Maximum Marginal Likelihood Estimation of a Monotonic Polynomial Generalized Partial Credit Model with Applications to Multiple Group Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a semi-parametric approach to estimating item response functions (IRF) useful when the true IRF does not strictly follow commonly used functions. Our approach replaces the linear predictor of the generalized partial credit model with a monotonic polynomial. The model includes the regular generalized partial credit model at the lowest order polynomial. Our approach extends Liang's (A semi-parametric approach to estimate IRFs, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, 2007) method for dichotomous item responses to the case of polytomous data. Furthermore, item parameter estimation is implemented with maximum marginal likelihood using the Bock-Aitkin EM algorithm, thereby facilitating multiple group analyses useful in operational settings. Our approach is demonstrated on both educational and psychological data. We present simulation results comparing our approach to more standard IRF estimation approaches and other non-parametric and semi-parametric alternatives.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it