MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391805658 · doi:10.1080/26939169.2024.2319152

Age Guessing: A Game to Introduce Fundamental Statistical Concepts

2024· article· en· W4391805658 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Rastpour, Abraham Amini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistics and Data Science Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical economicsPsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop a spreadsheet-based game to illustrate fundamental statistical concepts in the first class of an undergraduate Statistics course to motivate students about the topics that they will learn in upcoming classes.This game has been implemented by Google Forms and Google Sheets and can be played in both online and in-person classes of small and large sizes.Statistics is one of the most anxiety-inducing courses for undergraduate students, especially if mathematics is not the focus of their program.Negative anecdotes about the course, mathematics anxiety, and not knowing what the course is exactly about and how practical it can be are among the reasons that contribute to statistics anxiety.The first class provides a good opportunity for an instructor to mitigate these negative impressions and to set a positive attitude toward the course.A pre-and post-game group discussion that we have conducted systematically for six years suggests that the game addresses the students'negative impression about the course and helps them gain a clearer understanding of the tools and skills they will learn in Statistics.Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistics and Data Science EducationSame topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207