Predictive Student Modeling in Educational Games with Multi-Task Learning
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
Modeling student knowledge is critical in adaptive learning environments. Predictive student modeling enables formative assessment of student knowledge and skills, and it drives personalized support to create learning experiences that are both effective and engaging. Traditional approaches to predictive student modeling utilize features extracted from students’ interaction trace data to predict student test performance, aggregating student test performance as a single output label. We reformulate predictive student modeling as a multi-task learning problem, modeling questions from student test data as distinct “tasks.” We demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach by utilizing student data from a series of laboratory-based and classroom-based studies conducted with a game-based learning environment for microbiology education, Crystal Island. Using sequential representations of student gameplay, results show that multi-task stacked LSTMs with residual connections significantly outperform baseline models that do not use the multi-task formulation. Additionally, the accuracy of predictive student models is improved as the number of tasks increases. These findings have significant implications for the design and development of predictive student models in adaptive learning environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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