Infeasibility in automated test assembly models: A comparison study of different methods

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 42, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 223-243

  Huitzing, Hiddo A ^a   Veldkamp, Bernard P ^b   Verschoor, Angela J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c Cito group   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 24644494260     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2005.00012.x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adema, J. J., Boekkooi-Timminga, E., & van der Linden, W. J. (1991). Achievement test construction using 0-1 linear programming. European Journal of Operations Research, 55, 103-111.
2. Amaldi, E. (1994). From finding maximum feasible subsystems of linear systems to feedforward neural network design. Ph.D. thesis no. 1282, Département de Mathématiques, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland.
3. Armstrong, R. D., Jones, D. H., & Wang, Z. (1995). Network optimization in constrained standardized test construction. Application of Management Science, 8, 189-212.
4. Boneh, A. (1984). Identification of redundancy by a set-covering equivalence In J.P. Brans (Ed.), Operational Research, 84 (pp. 407-422). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
5. Chinneck, J. W. (1993). Infeasibility analysis using MINOS. Computers and Operations Research, 21, 1-9.
6. Chinneck, J. W. (1997). Feasibility and viability. In T. Gal & H. J. Greenberg (Eds.), Advances in sensitivity analysis and parametric programming (pp. 14.1-14.41). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
7. Chinneck, J. W. (2000). Fast heuristics for the maximum feasible subsystem problem. Technical Report SCE-00-02. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University, Systems and Computer Engineering.
8. Chinneck, J. W., & Dravnieks, E. W. (1991). Locating minimal infeasible constraint sets in linear programs. ORSA Journal on Computing, 3, 157-168.
9. Feng, J. (1999). Nonlinear redundancy: Where is the information. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.
10. Greenberg, H. J. (1987). Intelligent analysis support for linear programs. Operations Research Letters, 6, 249-255.
11. Greenberg, H. J. (1992). Enhancements of ANALYZE: A computer-assisted analysis system for linear programming. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 19(2), 233-256.
12. Huitzing, H. A. (2002). NuzLight, free academic computer software for LPTA models, using different solvers. Groningen: University of Groningen. http://www.oprit.rug.nl/ huitzing/Research.html.
13. Huitzing, H. A. (2003). Infeasibility in automated test assembly: Causes and solutions. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
14. Huitzing, H. A. (2004a). Solving infeasible linear programming test assembly models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 175-192.
15. Huitzing, H. A. (2004b). Using set covering with item sampling to analyze infeasibility of linear programming test assembly models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 355-375.
16. ILOG. (2001). CPLEX 6.6 [Computer program and manual]. Incline Village, NV: ILOG, Inc.
17. Luecht, R. M. (1998). Computer-assisted test assembling using optimization heuristics. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 224-236.
18. Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. J. (1998). Some practical examples of computer-adaptive sequential testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 229-249.
19. Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. J. (2000). Computer-adaptive sequential testing. In W. J. van der Linden & C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 117-128). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20. Nemhauser, G. L., & Wolsey, L. A. (1988). Integer and combinatorial optimization. New York: Wiley.
21. Nering, E. D., & Tucker, A. W. (1993). Linear programs and related problems. Boston: Academic Press.
22. Papadimitriou, Ch. H., & Steiglitz, K. (1982). Combinatorial optimization: Algorithms and complexity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23. Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277-292.
24. Stocking, M. L., Swanson, M. L., & Pearlman, M. (1993). Application of an automated item selection method to real data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 167-176.
25. Swanson, L., & Stocking, M. L. (1993). A model and heuristic for solving very large item selection problems. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 151-166.
26. Timminga, E. (1998). Solving infeasibility problems in computerized test assembly. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 280-291.
27. van der Linden, W. J. (2000). Constrained adaptive testing with shadow tests. In W. J. van der Linden and C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 27-53). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
28. van der Linden, W. J., & Adema, J. J. (1998). Simultaneous assembly of multiple test forms. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 185-198.
29. van der Linden, W. J., & Boekkooi-Timminga, E. (1989). A maximin model for test design with practical constraints. Psychometrika, 54, 237-247.
30. van der Linden, W. J., & Reese, L. M. (1998). A model for optimal constrained adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 259-270.
31. Veldkamp, B. P. (1999). Multi-objective test assembly problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 253-266.
32. Veldkamp, B. P. (2002). Multidimensional constrained test assembly. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 133-146.
33. Veldkamp, B. P., & van der Linden, W. J. (2002). Multidimensional constrainted adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 67, 575-588.
34. Vos, H. J. (1999). Application of Bayesian decision theory to sequential mastery testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 271-292.
35. Wolsey, L. A. (1998). Integer programming. New York: Wiley.