MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377138803 · doi:10.3390/su15108246

LearningRlab: Educational R Package for Statistics in Computer Science Engineering

2023· article· en· W4377138803 on OpenAlexaff
Juan J. Cuadrado‐Gallego, Josefa Gómez, Abdelhamid Tayebi, Luis Aragonés, Carlos J. Hellín, Adrián Valledor

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorMathematics educationBachelor degreeProcess (computing)Computer scienceDegree (music)Engineering educationStatistics educationDescriptive statisticsStatisticsMathematicsEngineering managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes and evaluates the educational interest of LearningRlab, an educational R package developed for teaching statistics in computer science engineering. The package was developed by final degree project students to be used as an educational environment for statistics students who evaluated the package and provided feedback for future versions. Such a process increases the motivation of both groups of students. This paper presents how the use of the R packages conceived and developed for engineering education can improve the learning process in the computer science engineering bachelor’s degree. Two different evaluations, one performed by a group of statistics students, and the other performed by final degree project students, were used to evaluate the impact on the learning process of the first version of the package to develop the second version of the package, which corrects and enhances the first version. The evaluation results show a positive effect on the learning process in both subjects. The analysis of the learning outcomes reflected in the grades of the experimental and control groups demonstrates that LearningRlab can be used as a teaching aid for statistics and final degree project subjects of the computer science engineering degree. The average laboratory grade of the students who used the package (5.76) was noticeably higher than the average laboratory grade of students who did not use it (1.84).

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.026

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.357 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207