Attribution-Driven Teaching Interventions: Linking I-AHP Weighted Assessment to Explainable Student Clustering
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Student course performance evaluation serves as a critical pedagogical tool for diagnosing learning gaps and enhancing educational outcomes, yet conventional assessments often suffer from rigid single-metric scoring and ambiguous causality. This study proposes an integrated analytic framework addressing these limitations by synergizing pedagogical expertise with data-driven diagnostics through four key measure: (1) Interval Analytic Hierarchy Process (I-AHP) to derive criterion weights reflecting instructional priorities via expert judgment; (2) K-means clustering to objectively stratify students into performance cohorts based on multidimensional metrics; (3) Random Forest classification and SHAP value analysis to quantitatively identify key discriminators of cluster membership and interpret decision boundaries; and (4) attribution-guided interventions targeting cohort-specific deficiencies. Leveraging a dual-channel ecosystem across pre-class, in-class, and post-class phases, we established a hierarchical evaluation system where I-AHP weighted pedagogical sub-criteria to generate comprehensive student scores.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it