Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Luke G. Eglington

Publications and source records attributed to Luke G. Eglington.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

UNVaMP: Neural Knowledge Tracing with Variational Regularization of Latent Knowledge Dynamics

We introduce the Unified Neural Variational Measurement of Proficiency (UNVaMP) architecture, a knowledge tracing method that integrates observed student-item interactions with internal memory to produce evolving latent representations of student knowledge. These representations support accurate predictions of future responses while enabling explicit control over the smoothness of estimated learning trajectories. UNVaMP can be configured as either a purely neural model or a hybrid model that predicts responses through an interpretable measurement function over the latent space. We show that a pure neural configuration (UNVaMP-MLP) achieves the strongest predictive performance among compared models on three out of four datasets. Meanwhile, a hybrid configuration (UNVaMP-MIRT, using a 1PL MIRT measurement function) lags only slightly behind UNVaMP-MLP, indicating that the predictive cost of interpretability is modest. Beyond predictive accuracy, UNVaMP provides the following: a principled mechanism for controlling volatility when estimating student latent variables, quantification of uncertainty over student knowledge state estimates, and flexible input specification that supports heterogeneous student-item interaction features. In addition, the hybrid UNVaMP-MIRT configuration generates interpretable moment-in-time student knowledge state estimates. Using an experimental dataset, we show that auxiliary inputs induce structured changes in the predictive behavior of UNVaMP-MIRT, consistent with sensitivity to underlying structure beyond response correctness. Furthermore, through a simulation study, we show that UNVaMP yields well-behaved knowledge state estimates under controlled measurement conditions. In total, these results indicate that UNVaMP is both useful for real-world education systems and capable of recovering underlying structure from student-item interactions.

cs.LG↗

Modeling the EdNet Dataset with Logistic Regression

Many of these challenges are won by neural network models created by full-time artificial intelligence scientists. Due to this origin, they have a black-box character that makes their use and application less clear to learning scientists. We describe our experience with competition from the perspective of educational data mining, a field founded in the learning sciences and connected with roots in psychology and statistics. We describe our efforts from the perspectives of learning scientists and the challenges to our methods, some real and some imagined. We also discuss some basic results in the Kaggle system and our thoughts on how those results may have been improved. Finally, we describe how learner model predictions are used to make pedagogical decisions for students. Their practical use entails a) model predictions and b) a decision rule (based on the predictions). We point out how increased model accuracy can be of limited practical utility, especially when paired with simple decision rules and argue instead for the need to further investigate optimal decision rules.

cs.CY↗

Logistic Knowledge Tracing: A Constrained Framework for Learner Modeling

Adaptive learning technology solutions often use a learner model to trace learning and make pedagogical decisions. The present research introduces a formalized methodology for specifying learner models, Logistic Knowledge Tracing (LKT), that consolidates many extant learner modeling methods. The strength of LKT is the specification of a symbolic notation system for alternative logistic regression models that is powerful enough to specify many extant models in the literature and many new models. To demonstrate the generality of LKT, we fit 12 models, some variants of well-known models and some newly devised, to 6 learning technology datasets. The results indicated that no single learner model was best in all cases, further justifying a broad approach that considers multiple learner model features and the learning context. The models presented here avoid student-level fixed parameters to increase generalizability. We also introduce features to stand in for these intercepts. We argue that to be maximally applicable, a learner model needs to adapt to student differences, rather than needing to be pre-parameterized with the level of each student's ability.

stat.AP↗