Search

The document "Featured Papers in Computer Methods in Biomedicine" from the journal Bioengineering (Basel) highlights seven research papers showcasing the intersection of computer science and biomedicine. The papers cover topics such as predicting low bone mineral density in older women, improving ML models for disease prediction, creating patient-specific anatomical reconstructions, detecting atrial fibrillation, classifying Parkinson's disease patients, analyzing EEG data for brain connectivity, and exploring EEG-based brain-machine interfaces for older adults. The document emphasizes the potential of computational methods to revolutionize healthcare through personalized treatments, improved diagnostics, and enhanced patient outcomes. [Extracted from the article]

Misinformation is a complex and urgent sociotechnical problem that requires meaningful governance, in addition to technical efforts aimed at detection or classification and intervention or literacy efforts aimed at promoting awareness and identification. This review draws on interdisciplinary literature—spanning information science, computer science, management, law, political science, public policy, journalism, communications, psychology, and sociology—to deliver an adaptable, descriptive governance model synthesized from past scholarship on the governance of misinformation. Crossing disciplines and contexts of study and cases, we characterize: the complexity and impact of misinformation as a governance challenge, what has been managed and governed relative to misinformation, the institutional structure of different governance parameters, and empirically identified sources of success and failure in different governance models. Our approach to support this review is based on systematic, structured literature review methods to synthesize and compare insights drawn from conceptual, qualitative, and quantitative empirical works published in or translated into English from 1991 to the present. This review contributes a model for misinformation governance research, an agenda for future research, and recommendations for contextually‐responsive and holistic governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper-and-pencil programming strategy (PPS) is a way of representing an idea logically by any representation that can be created using paper and pencil. It was developed for non-computer majors to improve their understanding and use of computational thinking and increase interest in learning computer science. A total of 110 non-majors in their sophomore year were assigned to either a Logo or a PPS course with attendance being 2 hours per week for 15 weeks. To measure the effectiveness of PPS, the Group Assessment of Logical Thinking and a self-assessment survey pre- and post-test were used. Findings indicated that PPS not only improved students' overall logical thinking as much as did Logo programming learning, but also increased scores on one more subscale of logical thinking than did the Logo course. In addition, PPS significantly helped students understand the concept of computational thinking and increased their interest in learning computer science.

Reflective practice is an essential catalyst through which the benefits of teaching and learning can be reaped. Through it, weaknesses and strengths can be identified in a way that helps raise the level of addressing challenges that may arise as well as overcome them. This paper presents the critical reflective practices among computer science secondary school teachers from their point of view in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. To this extent, the study aims to determine the degree of critical reflective practices among computer science secondary school teachers in Riyadh from their perspective. The paper also seeks to investigate the effects of variables such as gender, qualifications and experience on the perceptions of the aforementioned teachers, towards the critical reflective practices among computer science secondary school teachers. The study tool is a questionnaire which consisted of two dimensions and was distributed to a population of 739 participants. From this, the study sample comprised (223) computer science teachers working in secondary school in Riyadh. The findings revealed that there is no significant difference in the estimation degree concerning the critical reflective practices due to the gender. From the results, it was also established that there is no significant difference in the degree of estimation in relation to the critical reflective practices due to educational qualification variables. On the contrary however, there is a significant difference in the degree of estimation in regard to the critical reflective practices due to the years of experience variable. These differences were evident in a group of those with more than 10 years of experience. The other findings produced by the study highlight that the participants are in agreement about the importance of critical reflective practices. The degree of reflective practice, which is from the participants' point of view, is considered to be of a high value. The majority of the subjects opted to agree with the practice of reflection after a training session. It was determined from the results that some of the most common strategies favored by practitioners involved the communal practice of mind reflection with individuals from outside the school.

Driving research questions from the prevailing issues and interests and developing from them new theories, formulas, algorithms, methods, and designs, and linking them to the interests of the larger audience is a vital component of scientific research papers. The present article discusses outlining purposes or stating the nature of the present research, and listing research questions or hypotheses in the introduction of academic papers. This corpus-based genre study focuses particularly on Move 3 of the model "occupying the niche." The results indicating disciplinary variation show that the writers of Computer Science (CS) research articles, over the years have developed an increased use of outlining purpose/stating the nature of the present research, having the characteristics of purposive, descriptive, extension of the previous work, contrast to the existing work, brevity, complexity, and a description of methodology. It also shows that listing research questions or hypothesis may have distinctively different functions in developing genres as compared to the established ones such as physics.

Context: The retraction of research papers, for whatever reason, is a growing phenomenon. However, although retracted paper information is publicly available via publishers, it is somewhat distributed and inconsistent. Objective: The aim is to assess: (i) the extent and nature of retracted research in Computer Science (CS) (ii) the post-retraction citation behaviour of retracted works and (iii) the potential impact upon systematic reviews and mapping studies. Method: We analyse the Retraction Watch database and take citation information from the Web of Science and Google scholar. Results: We find that of the 33,955 entries in the Retraction watch database (16 May 2022), 2,816 are classified as CS, i.e., ≈ 8%. For CS, 56% of retracted papers provide little or no information as to the reasons. This contrasts with 26% for other disciplines. There is also some disparity between different publishers, a tendency for multiple versions of a retracted paper to be available beyond the Version of Record (VoR), and for new citations long after a paper is officially retracted (median = 3; maximum = 18). Systematic reviews are also impacted with ≈ 30% of the retracted papers having one or more citations from a review. Conclusions: Unfortunately, retraction seems to be a sufficiently common outcome for a scientific paper that we as a research community need to take it more seriously, e.g., standardising procedures and taxonomies across publishers and the provision of appropriate research tools. Finally, we recommend particular caution when undertaking secondary analyses and meta-analyses which are at risk of becoming contaminated by these problem primary studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to investigate the differences between conference papers and journal papers in the field of computer science based on Bayesian network. This paper investigated the differences between conference papers and journal papers in the field of computer science based on Bayesian network, a knowledge-representative framework that can model relationships among all variables in the network. We defined the variables required for Bayesian networks modeling, calculated the values of each variable based Aminer dataset (a literature data set in the field of computer science), learned the Bayesian network and derived some findings based on network inference. The study found that conferences are more attractive to senior scholars, the academic impact of conference papers is slightly higher than journal papers, and it is uncertain whether conference papers are more innovative than journal papers. The study was limited to the field of computer science and employed Aminer dataset as the sample. Further studies involving more diverse datasets and different fields could provide a more complete picture of the matter. By demonstrating that Bayesian networks can effectively analyze issues in Scientometrics, the study offers valuable insights that may enhance researchers' understanding of the differences between journal and conference in computer science. Academic conferences play a crucial role in facilitating scholarly exchange and knowledge dissemination within the field of computer science. Several studies have been conducted to examine the distinctions between conference papers and journal papers in terms of various factors, such as authors, citations, h-index and others. Those studies were carried out from different (independent) perspectives, lacking a systematic examination of the connections and interactions between multiple perspectives. This paper supplements this deficiency based on Bayesian network modeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This small scale study aims to analyze the question papers of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education in the subject of computer science with reference to item analysis and Bloom's taxonomy. Data were collected from 100 students of Grade 9th and 10th from the schools of Lahore city using convenient sampling technique. Data collected on the papers developed by Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education for the year of 2015 and 2016. Item analyses were performed using Conquest software. Findings of the study shows that in the question papers conducted by Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education the majority questions were measuring the student abilities of knowledge and comprehension and only few questions were given to measure the student abilities to analyze, synthesize and evaluate, and this can be very helpful for the policy makers. Result of item analysis shows that many questions were not in the acceptable range of item difficulty and item discrimination. Items in the question papers were either too easy or too difficult. Findings revealed that the papers conducted and administered by Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education were not up to the mark, with reference to Bloom's taxonomy. The researcher recommended to train the assessment committee/panel developing the items. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre-evaluating scientific paper quality aids in alleviating peer review pressure and fostering scientific advancement. Although prior studies have identified numerous quality-related features, their effectiveness and representativeness of paper content remain to be comprehensively investigated. Addressing this issue, we propose a content-based interpretable method for pre-evaluating the quality of scientific papers. Firstly, we define quality attributes of computer science (CS) papers as integrity , clarity , novelty , and significance , based on peer review criteria from 11 top-tier CS conferences. We formulate the problem as two classification tasks: Accepted/Disputed/Rejected (ADR) and Accepted/Rejected (AR). Subsequently, we construct fine-grained features from metadata and knowledge entity networks, including text structure, readability, references, citations, semantic novelty, and network structure. We empirically evaluate our method using the ICLR paper dataset, achieving optimal performance with the Random Forest model, yielding F1 scores of 0.715 and 0.762 for the two tasks, respectively. Through feature analysis and case studies employing SHAP interpretable methods, we demonstrate that the proposed features enhance the performance of machine learning models in scientific paper quality evaluation, offering interpretable evidence for model decisions. • Define four criteria for quality evaluation of scientific papers: integrity, clarity, novelty, and significance. • Propose a framework for quality evaluation of scientific papers based on coarse features and knowledge entity network. • An effective algorithm for measuring the novelty and significance of scientific papers based on knowledge entity networks. • Create and release a rigorous dataset, which could serve as the gold standard for quality evaluation of scientific papers. • Conduct extensive experiments to validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we test the hypothesis that computer science papers asking questions (i.e., those with a question mark at the end of their title) are cited more frequently than those that do not have this property. To this end, we analyze a data set of almost two million records on computer science papers indexed in the Web of Science database and focus our investigation on the mean number of citations per paper of its specific subsets. The main finding is that the average number of citations per paper of the so-called “asking papers” is greater by almost 20% than that of other papers, and that this difference is statistically significant.