Wesley Calvert
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Wesley Calvert has a total of 58 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Valentina Harizanov
George Washington University
9 shared publications - Andrei Sergeevich Morozov
Sobolev Institute of Mathematics of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia
5 shared publications - Alexandra A. Soskova
Sofia University
3 shared publications - Douglas Cenzer
Department of Mathematics, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
3 shared publications John E. Porter
3 shared publications- Julia F. Knight
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME NOTRE DAME, IN 46556, USA
3 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 20 May 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Education Sciences
- Vol. 16 (5) , 806
Identifying Courses for Targeted Review Using GAP Analysis and Machine Learning
We examined the limitations of observed course DFWI rates (% of D and F grades, withdrawals, and incompletes) as evaluation metrics, which obscure student characteristics, course design, instruction, structure, and latent factors, posing challenges in identifying courses that need improvement. An artificial neural network (ANN) was trained using student data to model risk, accounting for variations in student characteristics. The model’s predictions on test data were averaged at the course level, producing expected DFWI rates based on student composition. Courses with high observed DFWI rates and large deviations between observed and predicted DFWI rates (the GAP) were ranked and prioritized for review, as they may reflect aspects of course design, structure, or instructional practices warranting further qualitative evaluation. Our predictions are non-causal, and modeling calibration varies across subgroups; therefore, the original GAP rankings, robust to a post-hoc calibration check, are presented as risk-adjusted indicators for prioritizing courses for further review rather than as definitive causal measures of course quality. Rankings based on observed DFWI rates differ substantially from risk-adjusted GAP rankings, indicating that relying on observed DFWI rates alone may misidentify high-risk courses. Our methodology can assist educators and administrators in making fair resource allocation decisions and improving student outcomes.
- 20 May 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Education Sciences
- Vol. 16 (5) , 806
Open AccessIdentifying Courses for Targeted Review Using GAP Analysis and Machine Learning
We examined the limitations of observed course DFWI rates (% of D and F grades, withdrawals, and incompletes) as evaluation metrics, which obscure student characteristics, course design, instruction, structure, and latent factors, posing challenges in identifying courses that need improvement. An artificial neural network (ANN) was trained using student data to model risk, accounting for variations in student characteristics. The model’s predictions on test data were averaged at the course level, producing expected DFWI rates based on student composition. Courses with high observed DFWI rates and large deviations between observed and predicted DFWI rates (the GAP) were ranked and prioritized for review, as they may reflect aspects of course design, structure, or instructional practices warranting further qualitative evaluation. Our predictions are non-causal, and modeling calibration varies across subgroups; therefore, the original GAP rankings, robust to a post-hoc calibration check, are presented as risk-adjusted indicators for prioritizing courses for further review rather than as definitive causal measures of course quality. Rankings based on observed DFWI rates differ substantially from risk-adjusted GAP rankings, indicating that relying on observed DFWI rates alone may misidentify high-risk courses. Our methodology can assist educators and administrators in making fair resource allocation decisions and improving student outcomes.
- 2 October 2025
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 31 (2) , 350-351
Shay Fuchs. Introduction to Proofs and Proof Strategies . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023, xiv + 342 pp.
- 2 October 2025
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 31 (2) , 350-351
Shay Fuchs. Introduction to Proofs and Proof Strategies . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023, xiv + 342 pp.
- 21 June 2025
- Published by Springer Nature in Theory of Computing Systems
- Vol. 69 (3) , 1-16
Normality, Relativization, and Randomness
- 21 June 2025
- Published by Springer Nature in Theory of Computing Systems
- Vol. 69 (3) , 1-16
Normality, Relativization, and Randomness
- Open Access
Failure Modes for Structural Highness Notions
In a previous paper, entitled "Structural Highness Notions," we defined several classes of degrees that are high in senses related to computable structure theory. Each class of degrees is characterized by a structural feature (e.g., an isomorphism) that it can compute if such a feature exists. In this paper, we examine each of these classes and characterize them based on what they do if no such object exists. We describe, in particular, reticent, loquacious, and collegiate senses of being high. These, respectively, reflect the case where a computation from the degree can give output only if the desired feature exists, the case where it will give output of some kind whether or not the feature exists, and the case where the degree will either compute the feature or the best available approximation to it.
Open AccessFailure Modes for Structural Highness Notions
In a previous paper, entitled "Structural Highness Notions," we defined several classes of degrees that are high in senses related to computable structure theory. Each class of degrees is characterized by a structural feature (e.g., an isomorphism) that it can compute if such a feature exists. In this paper, we examine each of these classes and characterize them based on what they do if no such object exists. We describe, in particular, reticent, loquacious, and collegiate senses of being high. These, respectively, reflect the case where a computation from the degree can give output only if the desired feature exists, the case where it will give output of some kind whether or not the feature exists, and the case where the degree will either compute the feature or the best available approximation to it.
- 2 November 2024
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the London Mathematical Society
- Vol. 110 (5)
Computability in infinite Galois theory and algorithmically random algebraic fields
We introduce a notion of algorithmic randomness for algebraic fields. We prove the existence of a continuum of algebraic extensions of that are random according to our definition. We show that there are noncomputable algebraic fields which are not random. We also partially characterize the index set, relative to an oracle, of the set of random algebraic fields computable relative to that oracle.In order to carry out this investigation of randomness for fields, we develop computability in the context of the infinite Galois theory (where the relevant Galois groups are uncountable), including definitions of computable and computably enumerable Galois groups and computability of Haar measure on the Galois groups.
- 2 November 2024
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the London Mathematical Society
- Vol. 110 (5)
Computability in infinite Galois theory and algorithmically random algebraic fields
We introduce a notion of algorithmic randomness for algebraic fields. We prove the existence of a continuum of algebraic extensions of that are random according to our definition. We show that there are noncomputable algebraic fields which are not random. We also partially characterize the index set, relative to an oracle, of the set of random algebraic fields computable relative to that oracle.In order to carry out this investigation of randomness for fields, we develop computability in the context of the infinite Galois theory (where the relevant Galois groups are uncountable), including definitions of computable and computably enumerable Galois groups and computability of Haar measure on the Galois groups.
- Open Access
Generically Computable Linear Orderings
We study notions of generic and coarse computability in the context of computable structure theory. Our notions are stratified by the $Σ_β$ hierarchy. We focus on linear orderings. We show that at the $Σ_1$ level all linear orderings have both generically and coarsely computable copies. This behavior changes abruptly at higher levels; we show that at the $Σ_{α+2}$ level for any $α\inω_1^{ck}$ the set of linear orderings with generically or coarsely computable copies is $\mathbfΣ_1^1$-complete and therefore maximally complicated. This development is new even in the general analysis of generic and coarse computability of countable structures. In the process of proving these results we introduce new tools for understanding generically and coarsely computable structures. We are able to give a purely structural statement that is equivalent to having a generically computable copy and show that every relational structure with only finitely many relations has coarsely and generically computable copies at the lowest level of the hierarchy.Open AccessGenerically Computable Linear Orderings
We study notions of generic and coarse computability in the context of computable structure theory. Our notions are stratified by the $Σ_β$ hierarchy. We focus on linear orderings. We show that at the $Σ_1$ level all linear orderings have both generically and coarsely computable copies. This behavior changes abruptly at higher levels; we show that at the $Σ_{α+2}$ level for any $α\inω_1^{ck}$ the set of linear orderings with generically or coarsely computable copies is $\mathbfΣ_1^1$-complete and therefore maximally complicated. This development is new even in the general analysis of generic and coarse computability of countable structures. In the process of proving these results we introduce new tools for understanding generically and coarsely computable structures. We are able to give a purely structural statement that is equivalent to having a generically computable copy and show that every relational structure with only finitely many relations has coarsely and generically computable copies at the lowest level of the hierarchy. - Open Access
- 28 April 2022
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 88 (4) , 1692-1724
STRUCTURAL HIGHNESS NOTIONS
- 28 April 2022
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 88 (4) , 1692-1724
Open AccessSTRUCTURAL HIGHNESS NOTIONS
- Open Access
- 23 December 2021
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 87 (3) , 1215-1230
INTERPRETING A FIELD IN ITS HEISENBERG GROUP
We improve on and generalize a 1960 result of Maltsev. For a field F, we denote by $H(F)$ the Heisenberg group with entries in F. Maltsev showed that there is a copy of F defined in $H(F)$ , using existential formulas with an arbitrary non-commuting pair of elements as parameters. We show that F is interpreted in $H(F)$ using computable $\Sigma _1$ formulas with no parameters. We give two proofs. The first is an existence proof, relying on a result of Harrison-Trainor, Melnikov, R. Miller, and Montalbán. This proof allows the possibility that the elements of F are represented by tuples in $H(F)$ of no fixed arity. The second proof is direct, giving explicit finitary existential formulas that define the interpretation, with elements of F represented by triples in $H(F)$ . Looking at what was used to arrive at this parameter-free interpretation of F in $H(F)$ , we give general conditions sufficient to eliminate parameters from interpretations.- 23 December 2021
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 87 (3) , 1215-1230
Open AccessINTERPRETING A FIELD IN ITS HEISENBERG GROUP
We improve on and generalize a 1960 result of Maltsev. For a field F, we denote by $H(F)$ the Heisenberg group with entries in F. Maltsev showed that there is a copy of F defined in $H(F)$ , using existential formulas with an arbitrary non-commuting pair of elements as parameters. We show that F is interpreted in $H(F)$ using computable $\Sigma _1$ formulas with no parameters. We give two proofs. The first is an existence proof, relying on a result of Harrison-Trainor, Melnikov, R. Miller, and Montalbán. This proof allows the possibility that the elements of F are represented by tuples in $H(F)$ of no fixed arity. The second proof is direct, giving explicit finitary existential formulas that define the interpretation, with elements of F represented by triples in $H(F)$ . Looking at what was used to arrive at this parameter-free interpretation of F in $H(F)$ , we give general conditions sufficient to eliminate parameters from interpretations. - 7 September 2018
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Logic and Computation
- Vol. 28 (7) , 1499-1522
Strong jump inversion
- 7 September 2018
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Logic and Computation
- Vol. 28 (7) , 1499-1522
Strong jump inversion