Extended Mixed‐Effects Item Response Models With the MH‐RM Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mixed‐effects item response theory (IRT) model is presented as a logical extension of the generalized linear mixed‐effects modeling approach to formulating explanatory IRT models. Fixed and random coefficients in the extended model are estimated using a Metropolis‐Hastings Robbins‐Monro (MH‐RM) stochastic imputation algorithm to accommodate for increased dimensionality due to modeling multiple design‐ and trait‐based random effects. As a consequence of using this algorithm, more flexible explanatory IRT models, such as the multidimensional four‐parameter logistic model, are easily organized and efficiently estimated for unidimensional and multidimensional tests. Rasch versions of the linear latent trait and latent regression model, along with their extensions, are presented and discussed, Monte Carlo simulations are conducted to determine the efficiency of parameter recovery of the MH‐RM algorithm, and an empirical example using the extended mixed‐effects IRT model is presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.042 | 0.098 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".