skip to main content
10.1145/3386527.3406729acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesl-at-sConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Automatic RNN Cell Design for Knowledge Tracing using Reinforcement Learning

Published:12 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Empirical results have shown that deep neural networks achieve superior performance in the application of Knowledge Tracing. However, the design of recurrent cells like long short term memory (LSTM) cells or gated recurrent units (GRU) is influenced largely by applications in natural language processing. They were proposed and evaluated in the context of sequence to sequence modeling, like machine translation. Even though the LSTM cell works well for knowledge tracing, it is unknown if its architecture is ideally suited for knowledge tracing. Despite the fact that there are several recurrent neural network based architectures proposed for knowledge tracing, the methodologies rely on empirical observations and trial and error, which may not be efficient or scalable. In this study, we investigate using reinforcement learning for the automatic design of recurrent neural network cells for knowledge tracing, showing improved performance compared to the LSTM cell. We also discuss a potential method for model regularization using neural architecture search.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3386527.3406729.mp4

mp4

4 MB

References

  1. Albert T Corbett and John R Anderson. 1994. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User modeling and user-adapted interaction 4, 4 (1994), 253--278.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. 2009. Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In 2009 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. Ieee, 248--255.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2018. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Xinyi Ding and Eric C Larson. 2019. Why Deep Knowledge Tracing has less Depth than Anticipated. International Educational Data Mining Society (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Fritz Drasgow and Charles L Hulin. 1990. Item response theory. (1990).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Mohammad M Khajah, Yun Huang, José P González-Brenes, Michael C Mozer, and Peter Brusilovsky. 2014. Integrating knowledge tracing and item response theory: A tale of two frameworks. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 1181. University of Pittsburgh, 7--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Quinn McNemar. 1947. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12, 2 (1947), 153--157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Philip I Pavlik Jr, Hao Cen, and Kenneth R Koedinger. 2009. Performance Factors Analysis--A New Alternative to Knowledge Tracing. Online Submission (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hieu Pham, Melody Y Guan, Barret Zoph, Quoc V Le, and Jeff Dean. 2018. Efficient neural architecture search via parameter sharing. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.03268 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Chris Piech, Jonathan Bassen, Jonathan Huang, Surya Ganguli, Mehran Sahami, Leonidas J Guibas, and Jascha Sohl-Dickstein. 2015. Deep knowledge tracing. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 505--513.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. Stamper, A. Niculescu-Mizil, S. Ritter, G.J. Gordon, and K. R. Koedinger. 2010. Algebra I 2005--2006. Challenge data set from KDD Cup 2010 Educational Data Mining Challenge. Find it at http://pslcdatashop.web.cmu.edu/KDDCup/downloads.jsp. (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Xiaolu Xiong, Siyuan Zhao, Eric G Van Inwegen, and Joseph E Beck. 2016. Going deeper with deep knowledge tracing. International Educational Data Mining Society (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Chun-Kit Yeung. 2019. Deep-IRT: Make Deep Learning Based Knowledge Tracing Explainable Using Item Response Theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.11738 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Michael V Yudelson, Kenneth R Koedinger, and Geoffrey J Gordon. 2013. Individualized bayesian knowledge tracing models. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education. Springer, 171--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jiani Zhang, Xingjian Shi, Irwin King, and Dit-Yan Yeung. 2017. Dynamic key-value memory networks for knowledge tracing. In Proceedings of the 26th international conference on World Wide Web. 765--774.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Barret Zoph and Quoc V Le. 2016. Neural architecture search with reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.01578 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Automatic RNN Cell Design for Knowledge Tracing using Reinforcement Learning

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          L@S '20: Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
          August 2020
          442 pages
          ISBN:9781450379519
          DOI:10.1145/3386527

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 August 2020

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • short-paper

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate117of440submissions,27%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader