PTPC-UHT bounce by David Parry (22169299)

“…<br>It contains the full Python implementation of the PTPC bounce model (<code>PTPC_UHT_bounce.py</code>) and representative outputs used to generate the figures in the paper. …”

Fig 3 - Using artificial intelligence tools to automate data extraction for living evidence syntheses by Evan Mitchell (20995743)

Cross-validation of Lasso regression of enhanced CT images. by Jiangfa Li (18345033)

Cross-validation of Lasso regression of enhanced MRI images. by Jiangfa Li (18345033)

The cross-validation diagram of Lasso regression of enhanced CT combined with MRI images. by Jiangfa Li (18345033)

Dentate granule cells have polarised responses to neuromodulators switch spiking behaviour under neuromodulation. by Domenico Guarino (20428000)

Estimating dopamine effects on humans. by Domenico Guarino (20428000)

Pseudo live-stream of EEG data is generated, and a simple pick-and-place flowchart is designed for channel selection and filtering. by Gursimran Singh (575288)

Segmentation module training details. by Khelina Fedorchuk (19130089)

Data features examined for potential biases. by Harry Hochheiser (3413396)

“…Representativeness of the population, differences in calibration and model performance among groups, and differences in performance across hospital settings were identified as possible sources of bias.…”

Analysis topics. by Harry Hochheiser (3413396)

“…Representativeness of the population, differences in calibration and model performance among groups, and differences in performance across hospital settings were identified as possible sources of bias.…”

Datasets To EVAL. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

Statistical significance test results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

How RAG work. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

OpenBookQA experimental results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

AI2_ARC experimental results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

TQA experimental results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

E-EVAL experimental results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

TQA Accuracy Comparison Chart on different LLM. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”

ScienceQA experimental results. by Jin Lu (428513)

“…We evaluated our proposed system on five educational datasets—AI2_ARC, OpenBookQA, E-EVAL, TQA, and ScienceQA—which represent diverse question types and domains. Compared to vanilla Large Language Models (LLMs), our approach combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with Code Interpreters achieved an average accuracy improvement of 10−15 percentage points. …”