Classification Analysis of Student Ability in Learning Using Clustering Method at SMA Tunas Pelita
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to classify the assessment of the learning process at SMA Tunas Pelita Binjai T.A. 2018/2019 based on the average grade X, additional subjects applied technology, and student absenteeism classified using Matlab.The data is processed based on learning grouping as much as 2 clusters with different centroids, namely for cluster 1 the average value of even and odd semesters for class X (85.0), additional subjects of applied technology (86.3) and student attendance (2.4) and cluster 2 the average grades of odd-even semesters for class X (68.2), additional subjects of applied technology (70.3) and student attendance (2.4). In the final result, it can be seen that the grouping of learning at SMA Tunas Pelita Binjai with 100 data can be divided into 2 groups, namely group 1 with 62 data with an average value of odd and even semesters and high additional applied technology and student absenteeism. low grades are classified as students with good grades and group 2 as many as 38 data with an average value of odd, even semesters and low values of applied technology and high student absenteeism belonging to students who have poor grades.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".