<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> 
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
 <title type="text">Blog of Stuff: Posts tagged 'Machine Learning'</title>
 <link rel="self" href="http://www.brinckerhoff.org/feeds/Machine-Learning.atom.xml" />
 <link href="http://www.brinckerhoff.org/tags/Machine-Learning.html" />
 <id>urn:http-www-brinckerhoff-org:-tags-Machine-Learning-html</id>
 <updated>2015-05-06T18:12:47Z</updated>
 <entry>
  <title type="text">It's hard to predict student scores</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="http://www.brinckerhoff.org/blog/2015/05/06/it-s-hard-to-predict-student-scores/?utm_source=Machine-Learning&amp;utm_medium=Atom" />
  <id>urn:http-www-brinckerhoff-org:-blog-2015-05-06-it-s-hard-to-predict-student-scores</id>
  <published>2015-05-06T18:12:47Z</published>
  <updated>2015-05-06T18:12:47Z</updated>
  <author>
   <name>John Clements</name></author>
  <content type="html">
&lt;p&gt;Good news, students. I can&amp;rsquo;t accurately predict your final grades based solely on your first two assignments, quizzes, and labs.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I tried, though&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;First, I took the data from Winter 2015. I separated the students into a training set (70%) and a validation set (30%). I used ordinary least-squares approximation to learn a linear weighting of the scores on the first two labs, the first two assignments, and the first two quizzes. I then applied this weighting to the validation set, to see how accurate it was.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Short story: not accurate enough.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On the training set, the RMS error is 7.9% of the final grade, which is not great but might at least tell you whether you&amp;rsquo;re going to get an A or a C. Here&amp;rsquo;s a picture of the distribution of the errors on the training set:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="figure"&gt;&lt;img src="/img/grade-prediction-training-errors.png" alt="distribution of errors on training set" /&gt;
 &lt;p class="caption"&gt;distribution of errors on training set&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The x axis is labeled in tenths of a percentage point. This is the density of the errors, so the y axis is somewhat unimportant.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, on the validation set, things fell apart. Specifically, the RMS error was 19.1%, which is pretty terrible. Here&amp;rsquo;s the picture of the distribution of the errors:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="figure"&gt;&lt;img src="/img/grade-prediction-validation-errors.png" alt="distribution of errors on validation set" /&gt;
 &lt;p class="caption"&gt;distribution of errors on validation set&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Ah well&amp;hellip; I guess I&amp;rsquo;m going to have to grade the midterm.&lt;/p&gt;</content></entry></feed>