Generative Adversarial Networks for High-Dimensional Item Factor Analysis: A Deep Adversarial Learning Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in deep learning and representation learning have transformed item factor analysis (IFA) in the item response theory (IRT) literature by enabling more efficient and accurate parameter estimation. Variational autoencoders (VAEs) are widely used to model high-dimensional latent variables in this context, but the limited expressiveness of their inference networks can still hinder performance. We introduce adversarial variational Bayes (AVB) and an importance-weighted extension (IWAVB) as more flexible inference algorithms for IFA. By combining VAEs with generative adversarial networks (GANs), AVB uses an auxiliary discriminator network to frame estimation as a two-player game and removes the restrictive standard normal assumption on the latent variables. Theoretically, AVB and IWAVB can achieve likelihoods that match or exceed those of VAEs and importance-weighted autoencoders (IWAEs). In exploratory analyses of empirical data, IWAVB attained higher likelihoods than IWAE, indicating greater expressiveness. In confirmatory simulations, IWAVB achieved comparable mean-square error in parameter recovery while consistently yielding higher likelihoods, and it clearly outperformed IWAE when the latent distribution was multimodal. These findings suggest that IWAVB can scale IFA to complex, large-scale, and potentially multimodal settings, supporting closer integration of psychometrics with modern multimodal data analysis.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".