A Minimalistic Approach to Predict and Understand the Relation of App Usage with Students' Academic Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to usage of self-reported data which may contain biasness, the existing studies may not unveil the exact relation between academic grades and app categories such as Video. Additionally, the existing systems' requirement for data of prolonged period to predict grades may not facilitate early intervention to improve it. Thus, we presented an app that retrieves past 7 days' actual app usage data within a second (Mean=0.31s, SD=1.1s). Our analysis on 124 Bangladeshi students' real-time data demonstrates app usage sessions have a significant (p<0.05) negative association with CGPA. However, the Productivity and Books categories have a significant positive association whereas Video has a significant negative association. Moreover, the high and low CGPA holders have significantly different app usage behavior. Leveraging only the instantly accessed data, our machine learning model predicts CGPA within ±0.36 of the actual CGPA. We discuss the design implications that can be potential for students to improve 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".