Research on the Cultivation of Humanistic Psychology among College Students through Interactive Music Education in Universities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Universities not only have the basic responsibility of cultivating talents and creating scholars, but also have the important mission of conveying the avenues and clarifying morality. Among them, humanistic psychology training is a talent training concept that has attracted much attention relative to professional quality training. It is mainly realized through the development of humanistic quality education in daily teaching. Humanistic quality education carefully sculpts and guides people's conduct, which can subtly influence the development of college students' outlook on life, world outlook and values in daily life, and is of great significance to promoting the common development of morality, intelligence, body and beauty. However, the research on the humanistic psychology of college students mainly stays at the theoretical and low-dimensional level. In response to the above problems, this paper took the interactive education of music in colleges and universities to carry out scientific data analysis and high-dimensional research on the humanistic psychology of college students. The research results have shown that the YOLOv5s-DenseASPP-CBAM model has the best effect. The AP value is the maximum value of 0.854 among all the tested models and the frame rate is 37.52 frames per second, which provided a basis for improving the humanistic psychology of college students.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it