An intelligent rule-oriented framework for extracting key factors for grants scholarships in higher education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education is a fundamental sector in all countries, where in some countries students com-pete to get an educational grant due to its high cost. The incorporation of artificial intelli-gence in education holds great promise for the advancement of educational systems and pro-cesses. Educational data mining involves the analysis of data generated within educational environments to extract valuable insights into student performance and other factors that enhance teaching and learning. This paper aims to analyze the factors influencing students' performance and consequently, assist granting organizations in selecting suitable students in the Arab region (Jordan as a use case). The problem was addressed using a rule-based tech-nique to facilitate the utilization and implementation of a decision support system. To this end, three classical rule induction algorithms, namely PART, JRip, and RIDOR, were em-ployed. The data utilized in this study was collected from undergraduate students at the University of Jordan from 2010 to 2020. The constructed models were evaluated based on metrics such as accuracy, recall, precision, and f1-score. The findings indicate that the JRip algorithm outperformed PART and RIDOR in most of the datasets based on f1-score metric. The interpreted decision rules of the best models reveal that both features; the average study years and high school averages play vital roles in deciding which students should receive scholarships. The paper concludes with several suggested implications to support and en-hance the decision-making process of granting agencies in the realm of higher 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".