MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799580483 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2018.14.09

Pedagogical Significance of Natural Language Programming in Introductory Programming

2018· article· en· W2799580483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Shumail Naveed, Muhammad Sarim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFirst-generation programming languageProgramming domainNatural language programmingFunctional logic programmingProgramming languageFifth-generation programming languageInductive programmingProgramming paradigmVery high-level programming languageSyntaxProcedural programmingExtensible programmingNatural languageArtificial intelligenceUniversal Networking LanguageComprehension approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning programming is hard for novice students. Complicated syntax and semantic of programming languages and lack of previous knowledge are the contributing factors behind the hardness of programming. Natural programming language allows to program in a natural language and thereby ease the programming. In this paper, it is ascertained whether natural programming language is fruitful in learning the elementary programming concepts and supportive in preparing students for introductory programming courses. The discussion included in this paper can be used to design supportive programming languages and formulating effective courses and learning material to ameliorate performance of students’ in learning of introductory programming environments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207