Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Interpreting Latent Student Knowledge Representations in Programming Assignments (2405.08213v1)

Published 13 May 2024 in cs.CL, cs.CY, and cs.LG

Abstract: Recent advances in artificial intelligence for education leverage generative LLMs, including using them to predict open-ended student responses rather than their correctness only. However, the black-box nature of these models limits the interpretability of the learned student knowledge representations. In this paper, we conduct a first exploration into interpreting latent student knowledge representations by presenting InfoOIRT, an Information regularized Open-ended Item Response Theory model, which encourages the latent student knowledge states to be interpretable while being able to generate student-written code for open-ended programming questions. InfoOIRT maximizes the mutual information between a fixed subset of latent knowledge states enforced with simple prior distributions and generated student code, which encourages the model to learn disentangled representations of salient syntactic and semantic code features including syntactic styles, mastery of programming skills, and code structures. Through experiments on a real-world programming education dataset, we show that InfoOIRT can both accurately generate student code and lead to interpretable student knowledge representations.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (52)
  1. Synthesizing tasks for block-based programming. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020.
  2. J. R. Anderson and R. Jeffries. Novice lisp errors: Undetected losses of information from working memory. Human–Computer Interact., 1(2):107–131, 1985.
  3. Y. Attali and J. Burstein. Automated essay scoring with e-rater® v. 2. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 4(3), 2006.
  4. F. B. Baker. The Basics of Item Response Theory. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, 2001.
  5. Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cogn. sci., 2(2):155–192, 1978.
  6. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712, 2023.
  7. Infogan: Interpretable representation learning by information maximizing generative adversarial nets. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2016.
  8. DAS3H: Modeling student learning and forgetting for pptimally scheduling distributed practice of skills. In International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), pages 29–38, 2019.
  9. A. Corbett and J. Anderson. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Model. User-adapted Interact., 4(4):253–278, Dec. 1994.
  10. Disentangling factors of variation via generative entangling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1210.5474, 2012.
  11. Automatic diagnosis of students’ misconceptions in K-8 mathematics. In Proc. CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Syst., pages 1–12, 2018.
  12. Automated scoring for reading comprehension via in-context bert tuning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), pages 691–697. Springer International Publishing, 2022.
  13. Option tracing: Beyond correctness analysis in knowledge tracing. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), pages 137–149. Springer, 2021.
  14. Exploring methods for generating feedback comments for writing learning. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 9719–9730, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, Nov. 2021. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  15. H. Heickal and A. Lan. Generating feedback-ladders for logical errors in programming using large language models. International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2024.
  16. Generalizing expert misconception diagnoses through common wrong answer embedding. Int. Educ. Data Mining Soc., 2019.
  17. Automated program repair using generative models for code infilling. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), 2023.
  18. N. A. Kumar and A. Lan. Improving socratic question generation using data augmentation and preference optimization. Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA), 2024.
  19. N. A. Kumar and A. Lan. Using large language models for student-code guided test case generation in computer science education. AI4ED workshop at AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2024.
  20. Tag-aware ordinal sparse factor analysis for learning and content analytics. In International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2013.
  21. J. Lee and A. Lan. Smartphone: Exploring keyword mnemonic with auto-generated verbal and visual cues. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), pages 16–27. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023.
  22. A diversity-promoting objective function for neural conversation models. In Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL), pages 110–119, 2016.
  23. Open-ended knowledge tracing for computer science education. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 2022.
  24. Tracing knowledge state with individual cognition and acquisition estimation. In ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 2021.
  25. Knowing when and where: Temporal-astnn for student learning progression in novice programming tasks. Int. Educ. Data Mining Soc., 2021.
  26. Algebra error classification with large language models. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), pages 365–376. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023.
  27. G. Mercatali and A. Freitas. Disentangling generative factors in natural language with discrete variational autoencoders. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021, 2021.
  28. R. Ostini and M. L. Nering. Polytomous item response theory models. Sage, 2006.
  29. Comparing comprehension measured by multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(3):215, 2013.
  30. S. Pandey and J. Srivastava. Rkt: relation-aware self-attention for knowledge tracing. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (CIKM), pages 1205–1214, 2020.
  31. Performance factors analysis–A new alternative to knowledge tracing. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), 2009.
  32. Deep knowledge tracing. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 505–513, 2015.
  33. Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2016.
  34. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog, 1(8):9, 2019.
  35. Codebleu: a method for automatic evaluation of code synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.10297, 2020.
  36. K. Rivers and K. R. Koedinger. Data-driven hint generation in vast solution spaces: a self-improving python programming tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (IJAIED), 27(1), 2017.
  37. Developing pedagogically-guided algorithms for intelligent writing feedback. International Journal of Learning Technology 25, 8(4):362–381, 2013.
  38. Automatic generation of programming exercises and code explanations using large language models. In ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER), 2022.
  39. A. Scarlatos and A. Lan. Tree-based representation and generation of natural and mathematical language. In 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 3714–3730. Association for Computational Linguistics, July 2023.
  40. Improving the validity of automatically generated feedback via reinforcement learning. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), 2024.
  41. Code-dkt: A code-based knowledge tracing model for programming tasks. International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2022.
  42. Kc-finder: Automated knowledge component discovery for programming problems. In International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2023.
  43. Saint+: Integrating temporal features for EdNet correctness prediction. In International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK), 2021.
  44. A. Singla and N. Theodoropoulos. From Solution synthesis to Student Attempt synthesis for block-based visual programming tasks. In International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2022.
  45. Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The journal of the learning sciences, 3(2):115–163, 1994.
  46. Exercise-enhanced sequential modeling for student performance prediction. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 32(1), 2018.
  47. K. Taghipour and H. T. Ng. A neural approach to automated essay scoring. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 1882–1891, Austin, Texas, Nov. 2016. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  48. W. J. van der Linden and R. K. Hambleton. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
  49. Y. Wang and N. Heffernan. Extending knowledge tracing to allow partial credit: Using continuous versus binary nodes. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), 2013.
  50. Dynamic key-value memory networks for knowledge tracing. In International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pages 765–774, Apr. 2017.
  51. Automatic short math answer grading via in-context meta-learning. International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), 2022.
  52. Programming knowledge tracing: A comprehensive dataset and a new model. International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW), 2021.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets