Predicting the Mathematics Literacy of Resilient Students from High‐performing Economies: A Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mathematics is a crucial yet challenging subject for all students. Therefore, it is important to understand the role of academic resilience in mathematics, which enables students to overcome academic challenges. This study applied two machine learning algorithms, Lasso Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF), to predict the mathematics literacy of resilient students from high-performing economies across cultures in PISA 2022. The findings indicated both RF and LR performed better in Western cultures than in Eastern cultures. Furthermore, in Eastern cultures, mathematics self-efficacy for 21st-century skills played an important role in predicting resilient students’ mathematics literacy, followed by self-efficacy towards mathematics, and mathematics anxiety. In Western cultures, self-efficacy towards mathematics was the predominant predictor, followed by mathematics self-efficacy for 21st-century skills. Theoretically, this study identifies key factors in predicting resilient students’ mathematics literacy across cultures. Methodologically, it is the first to apply ML in exploring resilient students’ mathematics literacy. Practically, it guides educators interested in developing interventions to improve resilient students’ mathematics literacy. • Lasso Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF) predicted the mathematics literacy of resilient students from high-performing economies. • Findings indicated both RF and LR performed better in Western cultures than in Eastern cultures. • In Eastern cultures, mathematics self-efficacy for 21st-century skills played an important role . • In Western cultures, self-efficacy towards mathematics was the predominant predictor.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".