You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi. In the notebook for analysis of ASSISTment 2009, it is mentioned that order_id column is non-chronological, which is in contradiction to the original website of ASSISTment.
Since I see no explicit timestamp column for 2009 dataset, nor have I found any paper explicitly stating it, can you confirm whether the order_id column can be treated as chronological ordering of the time series for each individual user? This ordering matters while creating the time series for actions taken by each user (I did not find code for tripple line formatting of this dataset version anywhere as to confirm whether order_id is in fact correct).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
MrMaks
changed the title
ASSISTment description - data log ordering
ASSISTment 2009 description - chronological ordering
May 16, 2021
📚 Documentation
Hi. In the notebook for analysis of ASSISTment 2009, it is mentioned that order_id column is non-chronological, which is in contradiction to the original website of ASSISTment.
(Source: https://sites.google.com/site/assistmentsdata/how-to-interpret)
Since I see no explicit timestamp column for 2009 dataset, nor have I found any paper explicitly stating it, can you confirm whether the order_id column can be treated as chronological ordering of the time series for each individual user? This ordering matters while creating the time series for actions taken by each user (I did not find code for tripple line formatting of this dataset version anywhere as to confirm whether order_id is in fact correct).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: