Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Implicit Heterogeneous Features Embedding in Deep Knowledge Tracing

  • Published:
Cognitive Computation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Deep recurrent neural networks have been successfully applied to knowledge tracing, namely, deep knowledge tracing (DKT), which aims to automatically trace students’ knowledge states by mining their exercise performance data. Two main issues exist in the current DKT models: First, the complexity of the DKT models increases the tension of psychological interpretation. Second, the input of existing DKT models is only the exercise tags representing via one-hot encoding. The correlation between the hidden knowledge components and students’ responses to the exercises heavily relies on training the DKT models. The existing rich and informative features are excluded in the training, which may yield sub-optimal performance. To utilize the information embedded in these features, researchers have proposed a manual method to pre-process the features, i.e., discretizing them based on the inner characteristics of individual features. However, the proposed method requires many feature engineering efforts and is infeasible when the selected features are huge. To tackle the above issues, we design an automatic system to embed the heterogeneous features implicitly and effectively into the original DKT model. More specifically, we apply tree-based classifiers to predict whether the student can correctly answer the exercise given the heterogeneous features, an effective way to capture how the student deviates from others in the exercise. The predicted response and the true response are then encoded into a 4-bit one-hot encoding and concatenated with the original one-hot encoding features on the exercise tags to train a long short-term memory (LSTM) model, which can output the probability that a student will answer the exercise correctly on the corresponding exercise. We conduct a thorough evaluation on two educational datasets and demonstrate the merits and observations of our proposal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. https://sites.google.com/site/assistmentsdata/home/assistment-2009-2010-data/skill-builder-data-2009-2010

  2. https://pslcdatashop.web.cmu.edu/DatasetInfo?datasetId=1198

References

  1. Agrawal R. Data-driven education: Some opportunities and challenges. EDM; 2016. p. 2.

  2. Ayers E, Nugent R, Dean N. A comparison of student skill knowledge estimates. EDM; 2009. p. 1–10.

  3. Baker RS , Corbett AT, Aleven V. More accurate student modeling through contextual estimation of slip and guess probabilities in Bayesian knowledge tracing. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS 2008, Montreal, Canada, June 23-27; 2008. p. 406–415.

  4. Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn 2001;45(1):5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cambria E, Hussain A. Sentic computing. Cogn Comput 2015 ;7(2):183–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang H, Hsu H, Chen K. Modeling exercise relationships in e-learning: a unified approach. EDM; 2015. p. 532–535.

  7. Cheung LP, Yang H. Heterogeneous features integration in deep knowledge tracing. ICONIP; 2017.

  8. Chung J, Gulcehre C, Cho K, Bengio Y. Gated feedback recurrent neural networks. ICML; 2015. p. 2067–2075.

  9. Corbett AT, Anderson JR. Knowledge tracing: modelling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Model User-adapt Interact 1995;4(4):253–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Corbett AT, Anderson JR. 1994. Knowledge tracing: modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

  11. Czerniewicz L, Deacon A, Glover M, Walji S. MOOC—making and open educational practices. J Comput High Educ 2017;29(1):81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Desmarais MC, Villarreal A, Gagnon M. Adaptive test design with a naive bayes framework. EDM; 2008. p. 48–56.

  13. Gao F, Zhang Y, Wang J, Sun J, Yang E, Hussain A. Visual attention model based vehicle target detection in synthetic aperture radar images: a novel approach. Cogn Comput 2015;7(4):434–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Garcia S, Luengo J, Saez JA, Lopez V, Herrera F. A survey of discretization techniques Taxonomy and empirical analysis in supervised learning. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2013;25 (4):734–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gong Y, Beck JE, Heffernan NT. Comparing knowledge tracing and performance factor analysis by using multiple model fitting procedures. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS 2010, Part I, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 14-18; 2010. p. 35–44.

  16. Goodfellow IJ, Bengio Y, Courville AC. 2016. Deep Learning. Adaptive computation and machine learning. MIT Press.

  17. Graves A, Mohamed A, Hinton GE. Speech recognition with deep recurrent neural networks. IEEE ICASSP; 2013. p. 6645–6649.

  18. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2009.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Hinton GE, Osindero S, Teh YW. A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural Comput 2006; 18(7):1527–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 1997;9(8):1735–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hu D. 2011. How Khan Academy is using machine learning to assess student mastery.

  22. Hu J, Yang H, Lyu MR, King I, So AM-C. 2017. Online nonlinear AUC maximization for imbalanced data sets. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learning Syst.

  23. Hu Z, Zhang Z, Yang H, Chen Q, Zuo D. A deep learning approach for predicting the quality of online health expert question-answering services. J Biomed Inform 2017;71:241–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Huang Y, González-brenes JP, Brusilovsky P. General features in knowledge tracing to model multiple subskills, temporal item response theory, and expert knowledge. EDM; 2014 . p. 84–91.

  25. Huang Y, Guerra J, Brusilovsky P. A data-driven framework of modeling skill combinations for deeper knowledge tracing. EDM; 2016. p. 593–594.

  26. Khajah M, Lindsey RV, Mozer M. How deep is knowledge tracing? EDM; 2016.

  27. Khajah M, Wing R, Lindsey RV, Mozer M. Integrating latent-factor and knowledge-tracing models to predict individual differences in learning. EDM; 2014. p. 99–106.

  28. Koedinger KR, Cunningham K, Skogsholm A, Leber B. An open repository and analysis tools for fine-grained, longitudinal learner data. EDM; 2008. p. 157–166.

  29. Kotsiantis S, techniques D. Kanellopoulos. Discretization a recent survey. GESTS International Transactions on Computer Science and Engineering 2006;32(1):47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton GE. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Commun ACM 2017;60(6):84–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Labutov I, Studer C. Calibrated self-assessment. EDM; 2016.

  32. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton GE. Deep learning. Nature 2015;521(7553):436–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Louppe G, Wehenkel L, Sutera A, Geurts P. Understanding variable importances in forests of randomized trees. NIPS; 2013. p. 431–439.

  34. Mikolov T, Karafiát M, Burget L, Cernocký J, Khudanpur S. Recurrent neural network based language model. INTERSPEECH; 2010. p. 1045–1048.

  35. Mingers J. An empirical comparison of pruning methods for decision tree induction. Mach Learn 1989;4(2): 227–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pardos ZA, Heffernan NT. Modeling individualization in a Bayesian networks implementation of knowledge tracing. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, UMAP 2010, Big Island, HI, USA, June 20–24; 2010. p. 255–266.

  37. Pavlik JrPI, Cen H, Koedinger KR. 2009. Performance factors analysis—a new alternative to knowledge tracing. Online Submission.

  38. Piech C, Bassen J, Huang J, Ganguli S, Sahami M, Guibas LJ, Sohl-Dickstein J. Deep knowledge tracing. NIPS; 2015. p. 505–513.

  39. Quinlan JR. C4.5: programs for machine learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schmidhuber J. Deep learning in neural networks: an overview. Neural Netw 2015;61:85–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Silver D, Huang A, Maddison CJ, Guez A, Sifre L, van den Driessche G, Schrittwieser J, Antonoglou I, Panneershelvam V, Lanctot M, Dieleman S, Grewe D, Nham J, Kalchbrenner N, Sutskever I, Lillicrap TP, Leach M, Kavukcuoglu K, Graepel T, Hassabis D. Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 2016;529(7587):484–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Spratling MW. A hierarchical predictive coding model of object recognition in natural images. Cogn Comput 2017;9(2):151–67.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Sun R. Anatomy of the mind: a quick overview. Cogn Comput 2017;9(1):1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sweeney M, Lester J, Rangwala H, Johri A. Next-term student performance prediction: a recommender systems approach. EDM; 2016. p. 7.

  45. Tang J, Alelyani S, Liu H. Feature selection for classification A review. Data classification: algorithms and applications; 2014. p. 37.

  46. Timofeev R. Classification and regression trees (CART) theory and applications. Berlin: PhD thesis, Humboldt University ; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Vinyals O, Toshev A, Bengio S, Erhan D. Show and tell: lessons learned from the 2015 MSCOCO image captioning challenge. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2017;39(4):652– 63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wang L, Sy A, Liu L, Piech C. Deep knowledge tracing on programming exercises. L@S; 2017. p. 201–204.

  49. Xiong X, Zhao S, Inwegen EV, Beck J. Going deeper with deep knowledge tracing. EDM; 2016. p. 545–550.

  50. Xu C, Li P. Dynamics in four-neuron bidirectional associative memory networks with inertia and multiple delays. Cogn Comput 2016;8(1):78–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Yang H, Ling G, Su Y, Lyu MR, King I. Boosting response aware model-based collaborative filtering. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2015;27(8):2064–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhang J, Shi X, King I, Yeung D. Dynamic key-value memory networks for knowledge tracing. WWW; 2017. p. 765–774.

  53. Zhang L, Xiong X, Zhao S, Botelho A, Heffernan NT. Incorporating rich features into deep knowledge tracing. L@S; 2017. p. 169–172.

Download references

Funding

The work described in this paper was partially supported by the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. UGC/IDS14/16).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computing, Hang Seng Management College, Shatin, Hong Kong

    Haiqin Yang

  2. Computer Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong

    Lap Pong Cheung

Authors
  1. Haiqin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lap Pong Cheung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haiqin Yang.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, H., Cheung, L.P. Implicit Heterogeneous Features Embedding in Deep Knowledge Tracing. Cogn Comput 10, 3–14 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-017-9522-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-017-9522-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation