MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215348957 · doi:10.21432/cjlt27895

Analysis of Facebook in the Teaching-Learning Process about Mathematics Through Data Science

2021· article· en· W3215348957 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ricardo-Adán Salas-Rueda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorPublishingContext (archaeology)Mathematical financeComputer scienceMathematics educationProcess (computing)Educational technologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this quantitative research is to analyze the impact of Facebook in the teaching-learning process in financial mathematics education, using data science, machine learning, and neural networks. The sample is composed of 46 students from the Bachelor of Administration, Commerce and Marketing program at La Salle University. The results of machine learning (linear regression) indicate that sending messages, watching instructional videos, and publishing exercises on Facebook supports the teaching-learning process in financial mathematics. Likewise, data science identified six predictive models for the use of Facebook in the educational context, by means of the decision tree technique. Analysis using neural networks identified the influence of sending messages, watching instructional videos, and publishing exercises on Facebook during the assimilation of knowledge and development of mathematical skills. Finally, Facebook is a technological and communication tool that transforms the organization of teaching and learning activities in financial mathematics education.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207