Bayesian Student Modeling Improved by Diagnostic Items

  • Yang Chen
  • Pierre-Henri Wuillemin
  • Jean-Marc Labat
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8474)


Bayesian network (BN) has been successfully applied in hierarchical student models. Some researchers used diagnostic strategies to improve the evidence level of student models. But test items are typically related to a dichotomous response model, namely students’ answers are scored as right or wrong. As we know, wrong answers result from lacking one or more relevant concepts in students’ knowledge states. This diagnostic information of wrong answers is ignored. To maximize the precision of student model, this paper presents an approach using diagnostic items, which are designed to provide the information about which concepts are probably lacked in students’ knowledge states when they give wrong answers. A modified NIDA (Noisy Input, Deterministic AND) model is built to represent the relations between students’ answers and their knowledge states. We use simulated students to evaluate our model and the results show that the efficiency and accuracy of student modeling are improved.


Student model Bayesian network NIDA Diagnosis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Conati, C., Gertner, A., VanLehn, K.: Using Bayesian Networks to Manage Uncertainty in Student Modeling. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 12(4), 371–417 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Millán, E., Pérez-de-la-Cruz, J.L., Suárez, E.: Adaptive Bayesian Networks for Multilevel Student Modelling. In: Gauthier, G., VanLehn, K., Frasson, C. (eds.) ITS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1839, pp. 534–543. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Millán, E., Pérez-de-la-Cruz, J.L.: A Bayesian Diagnostic Algorithm for Student Modeling and its Evaluation. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 12(2-3), 281–330 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collins, J.A., Greer, J.E., Huang, S.X.: Adaptive Assessment Using Granularity Hierarchies and Bayesian Nets. In: Frasson, C., Gauthier, G., Lesgold, A. (eds.) ITS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1086, pp. 569–577. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tchétagni, J.M.P., Nkambou, R.: Hierarchical Representation and Evaluation of the Student in an Intelligent Tutoring System. In: Cerri, S.A., Gouardéres, G., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2363, pp. 708–717. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de la Torre, J.: A Cognitive Diagnosis Model for Cognitively Based Multiple-Choice Options. Applied Psychological Measurement 33(3), 163–183 (2009)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Desmarais, M.C., Baker, R.S.J.d.: A Review of Recent Advances in Learner and Skill Modeling in Intelligent Learning Environments. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 22(1-2), 9–38 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carmona, C., Millán, E., Pérez-de-la-Cruz, J.L., Trella, M., Conejo, R.: Introducing Prerequisite Relations in a Multi-layered Bayesian Student Model. In: Ardissono, L., Brna, P., Mitrović, A. (eds.) UM 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3538, pp. 347–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yang Chen
    • 1
  • Pierre-Henri Wuillemin
    • 1
  • Jean-Marc Labat
    • 1
  1. 1.LIP6University Pierre and Marie CurieParisFrance

Personalised recommendations