MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415360001 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v5i1.1548

Sentiment Analysis of Students on Campus Facilities and Infrastructure Using the Naïve Bayes Classifier Method (Case Study STMIK Kaputama)

2025· article· W4415360001 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNaive Bayes classifierClassifier (UML)Sentiment analysisWeightingPrecision and recallRecallThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Campus facilities and infrastructure play an important role in supporting the quality of learning. STMIK Kaputama faces challenges in maintaining the quality of its facilities as the number of students increases. This study applies sentiment analysis to student comments regarding classrooms, laboratories, libraries, restrooms, parking, and internet access. The method used is the Naïve Bayes Classifier with TF-IDF weighting and text preprocessing, following the CRISP-DM framework. The results show an accuracy of 73%, with the best performance in the positive class with precision 0.72; recall 0.97; F1-score 0.82, while the negative class with precision 0.79; recall 0.38; F1-score 0.51 and the neutral class was not detected. These findings indicate that the model tends to be dominant in positive sentiment but is still weak in distinguishing between negative and neutral comments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.332 · 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