MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prediksi Disleksia pada Anak menggunakan Metode Naive Bayes

2024· article· en· W4402318875 on OpenAlexaff
Siti Alyunita Mega Lestari, Akim Manaor Hara Pardede, Magdalena Simanjuntak

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Kajian dan Penelitian Umum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNaive Bayes classifierPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dyslexia is a neurological disorder that affects a person's ability to read, spell, and understand words with a level of difficulty that is not in accordance with their level of intelligence or education. It is a lifelong condition that can affect the way the brain processes information related to reading and written language skills. This study uses the Naïve Bayes method. is a method that uses probability and statistical calculations. And the advantage of the Naïve Bayes classification is that this method only requires a small amount of training data to determine the parameter estimates needed in the classification process. The purpose of this study is to find out how to solve the diagnosis or problems arising from dyslexia in children made in an expert system using the Naïve Bayes method and to find out the results of making the system can replace an expert into a computer so that the diagnosis is easier and faster. The results of this study are by selecting the symptoms that occur in children according to what is experienced, the system can find out the child or patient can be diagnosed quickly according to consultation with a dyslexia expert.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Kajian dan Penelitian UmumSame topicData Mining and Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207