MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388552095 · doi:10.18535/ijsshi/v10i11.01

Analysis on The Origin, Development and Contribution of Ge’ez Numerals to The Modern Mathematics Education in Ethiopia: Status, Challenges and Future Opportunities.

2023· article· en· W4388552095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abreha Tesfay

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMekelle UniversityAddis Ababa University
KeywordsNumeral systemDecimalMultiplication (music)ArithmeticSubtractionMathematicsQuarter (Canadian coin)History of mathematicsMathematics educationHistoryClassicsCombinatoricsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From the Ethiopian ancient history, it is believed that among the first peoples to inhabit was the Ge’ez speaking agrarians who settled in the Tigrayan highlands (Northern Ethiopia) around 2000BC. The inland Axum Kingdom was founded by Menilik I, a descendent of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, after the fall of the Da’amat Kingdom. Associated with the letters in the Ethiopian alphabet starting from ancient times, there are the Ge’ez numerals also called Ethiopic numerals. This study, therefore, purely used qualitative data obtained from interviewees and document analysis. The data obtained are narrated and organized. Patterns are identified and categorized. Finally, interpretations and implications of findings are included in the analysis. Findings indicated that there is a need for modification of the Ge’ez numbers by removing the bars above and below the original skeleton of the numbers so that doing mathematics with them becomes easier. Beyond this modification, evidence indicated that the Ge’ez numbers cannot be used for doing mathematical operations without the introduction of Ge’ez zero. Without the Ge’ez zero, it is impossible to deal with place value, decimal, and fractions, as well as with the common operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) and higher mathematics in general. Finally, it is the recommendation of this study to work towards awareness creation and consensus building about the common understanding and misunderstanding of Ge’ez numeration system at all levels as well as introducing this numeration system in to the school system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities InventionSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207