Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the expansion of the Coronavirus in the past few years, many schools have switched to online or a hybrid between online and in-person learning. This has caused grades to drop drastically on a nationwide level. To exemplify this, The New York Times stated, "In Houston, about half of high school students got at least one F in the fall 2020 semester, compared with 35 percent the year before. In Dallas, five high schools had more than a quarter of students failing two or more courses this spring, up from just one school two years ago. And in Chicago, a recent story by WBEZ described teachers at high-poverty high schools agonizing about whether to fail students"(Taylor, Nierenberg, 2021). This study looks at the relationship between emotional intelligence, the ability to analyze nonverbal cues, and grade point average (GPA). I conducted the survey to find a solution to the drastically dropping GPAs of high school students across the nation. If emotional intelligence is a determining factor in raising GPA, schools could implement programs to elevate students' emotional intelligence and therefore their grades.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".