Evaluation System of College Ideological and Political Education Index Based on Data Mining Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Intellectual and Political (IAP) education provided in colleges and universities is a significant component of higher education and is crucial to developing the socialist cause with Chinese characteristics and enhancing the IAP abilities of college students. The construction of college IAP education index assessment system based on multimodal learning type data mining algorithm can solve the current situation of the lack of college IAP education index assessment system. Therefore, this paper constructed an assessment system of college IAP education indicators based on data mining algorithm. It was a system that conformed to the requirements of the development of the times and the laws of education and had good human-computer interaction. Through the experiment, the comprehensive satisfaction score of the sample to the assessment system of college IAP teaching indicators based on data mining algorithm was about 4.19, and the comprehensive satisfaction score to the traditional assessment system of college IAP teaching indicators was about 2.87. The college IAP education index assessment system based on data mining algorithm was superior to the traditional college IAP education index assessment system, which made the assessment activities effectively play the role of summing up experience, learning lessons, promoting work improvement, establishing goal orientation, etc.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".