MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415359954 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v5i1.1499

Clustering of Extracurricular Interest at SMP Negeri 5 Kota Binjai

2025· article· W4415359954 on OpenAlexaff
A Virginia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSTEM Education
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisCoachingData collectionIdentification (biology)Test (biology)Class (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study grouped the interest of SMP Negeri 5 Binjai City students in extracurricular activities using the clustering method based on 2018–2024 data with variables of activity type, activeness, and achievement. The goal is to identify patterns of interest and utilize them for program management and development. The results are expected to help schools develop effective coaching strategies according to the characteristics of students. Education shapes character and develops students' potential not only academically, but also through extracurriculars. At SMP Negeri 5 Binjai City, extracurricular participation is not evenly distributed, affecting the effectiveness of supervisors and the development of activities. This study uses the clustering method to group students based on interests, activeness, and achievements, thereby helping schools manage and develop extracurriculars more effectively. This research is carried out in a structured manner through several stages: identification of problems to determine the focus of the research, collection of supporting and main data, study of related theories, analysis of data according to variables, testing and implementation of results, and evaluation to conclude findings and provide suggestions. This framework ensures that research is directed to produce useful results. This study succeeded in grouping the extracurricular interests of SMP Negeri 5 Binjai City students using the k-means algorithm with variables of activity type, activeness, and achievement through three cluster scenarios. Three clusters are sufficient for general strategies, while four or five clusters provide more specific coaching details, helping schools organize student motivational strategies, facilities, mentors, and programs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicSTEM EducationFrench-language works237,207