Spatial Confounding in Hurdle Multilevel Beta Models: the Case of the Brazilian Mathematical Olympics for Public Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Among the many disparities for which Brazil is known is the difference in performance across students who attend the three administrative levels of Brazilian public schools: federal, state and municipal. Our main goal is to investigate whether student performance in the Brazilian Mathematical Olympics for Public Schools is associated with school administrative level and student gender. For this, we propose a hurdle hierarchical beta model for the scores of students who took the examination in the second phase of these Olympics, in 2013. The mean of the beta model incorporates fixed and random effects at the student and school levels. We explore different distributions for the random school effect. As the posterior distributions of some fixed effects change in the presence, and distribution, of the random school effects, we also explore models that constrain random school effects to the orthogonal complement of the fixed effects. We conclude that male students perform slightly better than female students and that, on average, federal schools perform substantially better than state or municipal schools. However, some of the best municipal and state schools perform as well as some federal schools. We hypothesize that this is due to individual teachers who successfully motivate and prepare their students to perform well in the mathematical Olympics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".