Dynamic cognitive tracing: Towards unified discovery of student and cognitive models

Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, EDM 2012

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages

  González Brenes, José P ^a   Mostow, Jack ^a  

^a Carnegie Mellon University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; DATA MINING; LEARNING SYSTEMS;

ACCURATE PREDICTION; INTEGRATED APPROACH; INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM; INTELLIGENT TUTORS; KNOWLEDGE TRACINGS; PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE; STUDENT PERFORMANCE; SYNTHETIC DATASETS;

STUDENTS;

EID: 85084012375     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. R. Baker, A. Corbett, and V. Aleven. More accurate student modeling through contextual estimation of slip and guess probabilities in bayesian knowledge tracing. In B. Woolf, E. Aïmeur, R. Nkambou, and S. Lajoie, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, volume 5091 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 406–415. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2008. ISBN 978-3-540-69130-3. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69132-7_44.
2. T. Barnes. The q-matrix method: Mining student response data for knowledge. In J. Beck, editor, Proceedings of AAAI 2005: Educational Data Mining Workshop, pages 978–980, Pittsburgh, PA, 2005.
3. T. Barnes, D. Bitzer, and M. Vouk. Experimental analysis of the q-matrix method in knowledge discovery. In M.-S. Hacid, N. Murray, Z. Ras, and S. Tsumoto, editors, Foundations of Intelligent Systems, volume 3488 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 11–41. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2005. ISBN 978-3-540-25878-0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11425274_62.
4. J. Beck. Difficulties in inferring student knowledge from observations (and why you should care). In Educational Data Mining: Supplementary Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of Artificial Intelligence in Education, pages 21–30, Marina del Rey, CA, 2007.
5. J. Beck and K.-M. Chang. Identifiability: A fundamental problem of student modeling. In C. Conati, K. McCoy, and G. Paliouras, editors, User Modeling 2007, volume 4511 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 137–146. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2007. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-540-73078-1_17.
6. J. Beck and J. Mostow. How who should practice: Using learning decomposition to evaluate the efficacy of different types of practice for different types of students. In B. Woolf, E. Ameur, R. Nkambou, and S. Lajoie, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, volume 5091 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 353–362. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2008. ISBN 978-3-540-69130-3.
7. H. Cen, K. Koedinger, and B. Junker. Learning factors analysis: A general method for cognitive model evaluation and improvement. In M. Ikeda, K. Ashley, and T.-W. Chan, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, volume 4053 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 164–175. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2006. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11774303_17.
8. A. Corbett. Cognitive computer tutors: Solving the two-sigma problem. In M. Bauer, P. Gmytrasiewicz, and J. Vassileva, editors, User Modeling 2001, volume 2109 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 137–147. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2001. ISBN 978-3-540-42325-6. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ 3-540-44566-8_14.
9. A. Corbett and J. Anderson. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User modeling and user-adapted interaction, 4(4):253–278, 1994.
10. A. Dempster, N. Laird, and D. Rubin. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), pages 1–38, 1977.
11. M. Desmarais. Conditions for effectively deriving a q-matrix from data with non-negative matrix factorization. best paper award. In EDM, pages 41–50, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2011.
12. Z. Ghahramani and M. Jordan. Factorial hidden markov models. Machine learning, 29(2):245–273, 1997.
13. S. Goldwater and T. Griffiths. A fully bayesian approach to unsupervised part-of-speech tagging. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, pages 744–751, Prague, Czech Republic, June 2007. Association for Computational Linguistics. URL http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P07-1094.
14. Y. Gong, J. Beck, and N. Heffernan. Comparing knowledge tracing and performance factor analysis by using multiple model fitting procedures. In V. Aleven, J. Kay, and J. Mostow, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, volume 6094 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 35–44. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2010. ISBN 978-3-642-13387-9.
15. F. V. Jensen, S. L. Lauritzen, and K. G. Olesen. Bayesian updating in recursive graphical models by local computations. Computational Statistical Quarterly, (4): 269–282, 1990.
16. M. Jordan and R. Jacobs. Hierarchical mixtures of experts and the em algorithm. Neural computation, 6(2): 181–214, 1994.
17. K. Koedinger, R. Baker, K. Cunningham, A. Skogsholm, B. Leber, and J. Stamper. A data repository for the EDM community: The PSLC DataShop. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2010.
18. K. Murphy. The bayes net toolbox for matlab. Computing science and statistics, 33(2):1024–1034, 2001.
19. P. Pavlik, H. Cen, and K. Koedinger. Performance factors analysis–a new alternative to knowledge tracing. In Proceeding of the 2009 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Learning Systems that Care: From Knowledge Representation to Affective Modelling, pages 531–538. IOS Press, 2009.
20. J. Pearl. Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: networks of plausible inference. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1988. ISBN 0-934613-73-7.
21. L. Rabiner and B. Juang. An introduction to hidden markov models. ASSP Magazine, IEEE, 3(1):4–16, 1986.
22. J. Reye. Student modelling based on belief networks. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Ed., 14:63–96, January 2004. ISSN 1560-4292. URL http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1434852.1434856.
23. A. Schein, L. Saul, and L. Ungar. A generalized linear model for principal component analysis of binary data. In C. M. Bishop and B. J. Frey, editors, Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 14–21, Key West, FL, 2003.
24. A. P. Singh and G. J. Gordon. A unified view of matrix factorization models. In Proceedings of the European conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases - Part II, ECML PKDD ’08, pages 358–373, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-540-87480-5. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87481-2_24.
25. N. Thai-Nghe, L. Drumond, A. Krohn-Grimberghe, and L. Schmidt-Thieme. Recommender system for predicting student performance. Procedia Computer Science, 1 (2):2811 – 2819, 2010. ISSN 1877-0509. doi: 10.1016/j. procs.2010.08.006. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050910003194.
26. M. Tipping and C. Bishop. Probabilistic principal component analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 61(3):611–622, 1999.
27. T. Winters, C. Shelton, T. Payne, and G. Mei. Topic extraction from item-level grades. In J. Beck, editor, American Association for Artificial Intelligence 2005 Workshop on Educational Datamining, Pittsburgh, PA, 2005.
28. Y. Xu and J. Mostow. Using logistic regression to trace multiple subskills in a dynamic bayes net. In M. Pechenizkiy, T. Calders, C. Conati, S. Ventura, C. Romero, and J. Stamper, editors, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pages 241–245, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2011.