MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416260299 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.21744

Federated Item Response Models: A Gradient-driven Privacy-preserving Framework for Distributed Psychometric Estimation

2025· preprint· en· W4416260299 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ji Feng

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaConnaught FundUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsItem response theoryEstimationField (mathematics)Raw dataInformation privacyData modelingFederated learningPrivacy protection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Item Response Theory (IRT) models are widely used to estimate respondents' latent abilities and calibrate item difficulty. Traditional IRT estimation typically requires centralizing all raw responses, raising privacy and governance concerns. We introduce Federated Item Response Theory (FedIRT), a framework that enables distributed calibration of standard IRT models without transferring individual-level data, thereby preserving confidentiality while retaining statistical efficiency. To provide formal protection, we further develop FedIRT-DP, a user-level differentially private extension. Each site computes per-student gradients, clips them to a fixed norm, and shares only masked sums; the server adds calibrated Gaussian noise and performs MAP updates. This yields an auditable $(\varepsilon,δ)$ guarantee at the student level and a single, tunable privacy-utility trade-off via the clipping bound and noise scale. The same mechanism improves robustness to extreme response rows (e.g., all-zeros/ones). Across simulations, FedIRT matches the accuracy of centralized estimators from popular $\texttt{R}$ packages while avoiding data pooling; FedIRT-DP achieves comparable accuracy under stronger privacy and exhibits superior robustness to contamination. An empirical study on a real exam dataset demonstrates practical viability and consistent item and site-effect estimates. To facilitate adoption, we release an open-source $\texttt{R}$ package, $\texttt{FedIRT}$, implementing the two-parameter logistic (2PL) and partial credit models (PCM) with federated and differentially private training.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.234
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.234
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.564
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207