MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data Analysis of Student Academic Performance and Prediction of Student Academic Performance Based on Machine Learning Algorithms

2024· article· en· W4395454888 on OpenAlexaff
Yucong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Humanities Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningMathematics educationArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development and popularization of education, the quality of education has become one of the key factors in the development of a country. And students' academic performance, as one of the important indicators of education quality, has been attracting much attention. This paper mines and analyzes the data affecting students' academic performance, and also conducts a predictive study of students' academic performance using logistic regression model. In this study, 30 indicators such as gender, age, family size, parental education, parental occupation, family relationship, health, and the number of drinks per this paperek and per month this paperre used as input variables, and students' academic performance was categorized into SUCCESS and FAIL, and the training and test sets this paperre divided according to the ratio of 7:3, and the logistic regression model was used for training and prediction. The results show that the logistic regression model has high prediction accuracy in predicting students' academic performance (whether they fail or not), with an accuracy of 95.8%, precision of 96.7%, recall of 95.1%, and F1 of 95.8%. This indicates that the logistic regression model has high accuracy and reliability in predicting students' academic performance. The results of this study are important for schools and educational organizations. Through the prediction of students' academic performance, schools can identify students' learning problems in time and take targeted measures to help students improve their academic performance. Meanwhile, this study also provides some useful reference information for individual students to help them better understand their learning situation, adjust their learning strategies in time and improve their learning efficiency. In the future, the method can be further explored and improved to enhance the accuracy and reliability of the prediction and to provide better support and assistance for students' learning and development.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.452
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Humanities ResearchSame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207