Cognitive Diagnostic Models

Modeling the latent, multi-step reasoning processes of learners is a core challenge for adaptive tutoring systems, which often rely on simple right/wrong answers rather than understanding how students think. Instantiated here for grammatical reasoning, this study introduces a diagnostic framework that makes students' step-by-step problem-solving visible by analyzing their action sequences in an interactive learning game. The framework computes five interpretable strategy dimensions (e.g., systematic error correction, random guessing), estimates coordination demand from task structure and behavioral patterns, and classifies reasoning into four distinct states. Analyzing 36,234 interactions from 234 students working on 42 morphosyntactic exercises, we found that reasoning strategies vary primarily by context rather than stable traits (intraclass correlation = 0.14), and students show high persistence in unproductive states; specifically, 74.6% of failures driven by high coordination demand (rather than simple knowledge gaps) are followed by another failure without intervention. Our early warning model predicts validation success with strong accuracy (AUC = 0.826 using strategy patterns alone; 0.902 with additional sequential context) while avoiding circular reliance on current error counts. These findings demonstrate that making latent reasoning processes visible enables earlier, more targeted scaffolding that responds to how students are thinking rather than simply whether they succeed. While demonstrated in language learning, the framework provides a generalizable, interpretable architecture for diagnosing complex, structured reasoning in any domain.

Cognitive Diagnostic Models (CDMs) identify which specific skills a student has and has not mastered, the signal a personalized learning path needs and a single aggregate score cannot give. Yet they are rarely deployed. The obstacle is their precondition: the Q-matrix, a mapping from every assessment item to the skills it requires, historically authored by hand. We separate the task into two stages: first construct the curriculum's own knowledge graph, the full space of concepts and skills it contains, independent of any item; then map items against that graph on demand. This paper addresses the first stage only. The item-mapping stage is designed but not implemented here, so the claim that this shifts judgment cost from once per item to once per curriculum is a design rationale rather than a finding. We present Curriculum Brain, a two-repository system pairing a version-controlled knowledge base with an agentic pipeline of eleven single-responsibility agents under a thin deterministic orchestrator. It generates candidate concept-skill mappings from official curriculum documents, checks them against accumulated rules, and compares them with a concept-skill map extracted independently from the textbook, repairing its own failures and escalating to a human only when it cannot resolve a case itself. Across 241 chapter runs (168 distinct chapters), 41.5% produced a Generator output passing both checks without a patch, and 67.6% resolved without escalation. Both are measured against criteria the system itself produced, so both describe internal consistency rather than agreement with an external standard, and both pool two pipeline configurations separated by a single change at run 77; after it the figures are 57.0% and 91.5%. Observed spend was $1.19 per chapter, API spend only, excluding human review. We release both the framework and the resulting curriculum dataset.

Cognitive diagnosis infers students' concept mastery from response logs. However, students' responses are not determined by mastery alone: non-cognitive factors such as emotion, engagement, and fatigue can also affect performance. Affective cognitive diagnosis therefore extends conventional cognitive diagnosis by incorporating affective states. Existing methods often assume that the cognitive diagnosis backbone has already explained ability, item, and concept effects, so the remaining errors can be attributed mainly to affect. We argue that this assumption can be insufficient in real educational data: item calibration bias, systematic concept bias, personalized student-concept deviations, and latent student-item matching can form stable cognitive residuals. Without an explicit modeling pathway, these residuals may leak into affective representations, producing affect contamination. To address this problem, we propose an ability-residual decoupled framework for affective cognitive diagnosis. The model first captures unmodeled cognitive residuals through student, item, concept, student-concept, and low-rank student-item components, and then uses an affective module to modulate guess/slip effects. A Q-matrix-constrained concept residual attention mechanism adaptively aggregates only item-relevant concept residuals. Experiments on ASSIST2017, ASSIST2012, ASSIST2009, and Junyi with six cognitive diagnosis backbones show response-prediction gains across the reported comparisons and generally improved affect alignment when affect labels are available. Ablation studies, leakage probes, principal component analysis visualization, long-tail analysis, and case studies further indicate that ability residuals absorb stable cognitive bias, reduce cognitive contamination in the affective branch, and enhance the robustness and predictive accuracy of cognitive diagnosis models.

Cognitive Diagnosis Models (CDMs) play a pivotal role in personalized online learning. Traditional CDMs rely on discrete, ID-based embeddings to represent students, exercises, and concepts. This paradigm diverges from the nature of learner cognition, where knowledge is not stored and retrieved as isolated symbols. As a result, CDMs suffer from semantic limitations when new exercises or concepts appear. In this paper, we propose a Process-aware Language Cognitive Diagnosis (PLCD) framework that uses language-derived structures as cognitive priors and response records to calibrate student posterior states. PLCD leverages large language models (LLMs) to construct concept schemas and cognitive process graphs, and uses target-conditioned semantic memory to retrieve historical responses that are relevant to each target exercise. A process-grounded Language-to-Cognition Mapper with DA-MoE experts and process-level contrastive learning then maps the textual evidence into a unified cognitive space. Experimental results show that PLCD not only outperforms traditional baselines in predicting student performance but also exhibits strong cognitive transfer capabilities. These results connect the computational power of LLMs with the psychometric goal of measuring latent knowledge states, suggesting that structured language priors calibrated by response records can improve cold-start robustness and cognitive grounding.

Significant challenges remain in AI-driven educational systems in balancing privacy preservation with accurate cognitive diagnosis. To overcome this, we propose a federated inference framework in which several commercial LLM APIs collaborate without requiring access to raw student data or proprietary model internals. Using multiple federated entities, such as LLaMA-3.3-70B, GPT-4o-mini, and Claude-3-Haiku, our framework builds upon a heterogeneous multi-LLM architecture. The predictions generated by these entities are combined with epsilon-local differential privacy by adding Laplace noise locally to each entity's prediction output before aggregation, while residual-based aggregation mitigates model heterogeneity. Our approach is predicated on an honest-but-curious trust paradigm in which API providers are presumed not to abuse submitted queries, and our differential privacy mechanism shields the published diagnostic results from external inference. We conduct rigorous privacy-utility analysis showing strong privacy guarantees with minimal accuracy loss, and extensive real-world evaluations across three educational benchmarks confirm the framework's practical usability and cross-domain generalizability.

Q-matrices play a central role in cognitive diagnosis within educational data mining (EDM), specifying which latent skills each assessment item requires. Data-driven Q-matrix estimation remains challenging when assessments involve many correlated skills and when real response patterns depart from idealized generative assumptions. We introduce a novel quantum sparse autoencoder (QSAE) for Q-matrix estimation, which, to the best of our knowledge, is the first application of quantum machine learning (QML) to cognitive diagnosis. Overall, the QSAE embeds each student's binary response vector into a quantum circuit using an encoder, compresses it into a sparse latent representation, and maps that representation to the Q-matrix. We benchmark the QSAE against a classical autoencoder (CAE) across 60 simulated datasets and 9 real-world assessment datasets. The results reveal complementary strengths. Although the CAE partially achieves higher average accuracy under several simulation conditions, the QSAE is substantially more stable across replications, exhibiting lower variance in 49 of the 60 conditions. Moreover, on real assessment data, the QSAE outperforms the CAE on 6 of the 9 datasets. These findings suggest that the principal advancement of QML in this setting is not universal accuracy improvement, but enhanced robustness and capability to explore latent-structure complexity in real datasets.

Psychometric calibration for educational tests typically requires costly human response data. Large language models (LLMs) simulated examinees offer a promising route to early calibration, but their responses are too accurate and too uniform. We propose Cognitive Diagnostic Profiling (CDP), a zero-shot framework that prompts LLMs to simulate plausible examinees with diverse cognitive profiles: binary attribute-mastery patterns are rendered as natural-language profiles and sampled under an uninformative or an informative distribution. Using the Tatsuoka fraction-subtraction dataset (536 examinees, 15 items, five attributes), we evaluated eight LLM configurations under no-profile, uninformative-CDP, and informative-CDP conditions, assessing alignment with human examinees at the ability-distribution, mastery-profile, and item-difficulty levels. CDP improved all three levels: distributional overlap rose across configurations; weighted correlations between profile-level scores and human profile expectations reached 0.92 to 0.98; and item-difficulty recovery improved in rank order and absolute alignment, most for reasoning-enabled models; in the strongest case, Gemini 3.0 Flash (Thinking), one-parameter logistic (1PL) difficulty Spearman correlations rose from 0.24 to 0.86 and 0.90 and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) fell from 6.31 to 1.30 and 0.90; the informative condition helped most where profile-level alignment was strong. CDP brings LLM-simulated examinees into closer psychometric alignment with human examinees, making them practical for operational test development.

The research proposes a multilayer Q-matrix-embedded neural network for cognitive diagnosis (M-QCDNet), which integrates the structural interpretability of cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) with the deep learning neural network (NN). M-QCDNet structures the item-skill relationship using the Q-matrix as a structural prior, ensuring latent mastery profiles remain interpretable and consistent with cognitive theory, followed by the proposed loss function with an L2 penalty to penalize skills not aligned with the Q-matrix and to balance predictive performance and structural alignment. Corresponding evaluation matrices, the interpretable alignment-based metrics that quantify the degree to which predicted skill activations correspond to item-level skills, were further developed. M-QCDNet offers practical benefits for classroom practice, enabling early detection of learning difficulties and supporting mastery-based interventions. By embedding diagnostic validity into model design, M-QCDNet bridges psychometric transparency and neural flexibility, advancing interpretable, fair, and actionable AI for cognitive diagnostics.

Digital learning environments record learners' responses to individual items, making it possible to study the development of specific skills rather than overall scores. Drawing conclusions about learning from these data requires a model that links responses to latent skills and tracks how mastery changes over time. When the skills measured by each item are unknown, the analyst must decide whether to estimate this structure, the Q-matrix, jointly with the learning process, or to establish it first and study learning afterwards. We show that this decision can change substantive conclusions about how learners develop. Using dynamic cognitive diagnostic models, we analyse data from two reading games measuring vocabulary and comprehension from Grade 2 to Grade 3, with item-text embeddings providing prior information for the unknown Q-matrix. A joint analysis and a bias-corrected stepwise analysis agree that most learners move toward mastering both skills, but disagree about how many remain only partially proficient at Grade 3, changing how reading progress would be reported. A simulation study identifies when the two analyses diverge and shows that joint analysis is more reliable when the item-skill structure is uncertain and the item pool changes between grades. We provide R code for both analyses.

Current evaluations of large language models aggregate performance across diverse tasks into single scores. This obscures fine-grained ability variation, limiting targeted model improvement and ability-guided selection for specific tasks. Motivated by this gap, we propose a cognitive diagnostic framework that estimates model abilities across multiple fine-grained dimensions. For mathematics, we construct a 35-dimensional ability taxonomy grounded in cognitive theory and domain knowledge. The framework employs multidimensional Item Response Theory with an item-ability association matrix to estimate fine-grained ability levels, which in turn enable prediction of performance on unseen items (questions of benchmark). Evaluated on 41 models, our approach demonstrates strong criterion validity, consistent ability estimates across benchmarks, and accurate prediction of unseen items with AUC ranging from 0.80 to 0.89 within benchmarks and from 0.77 to 0.86 across benchmarks, substantially exceeding trivial baselines. The framework generalizes across scientific domains, producing consistent diagnostic performance in physics (27 dimensions), chemistry (58 dimensions), and computer science (12 dimensions). This work establishes a principled framework for fine-grained assessment of abilities, with potential applications in targeted training, ability-guided model selection, and ability-aware benchmark design.

Learner-item cognitive modeling plays a central role in the web-based online intelligent education system by enabling cognitive diagnosis (CD) across diverse online educational scenarios. Although ID embedding remains the mainstream approach in cognitive modeling due to its effectiveness and flexibility, recent advances in language models (LMs) have introduced new possibilities for incorporating rich semantic representations to enhance CD performance. This highlights the need for a comprehensive analysis of how LMs enhance embeddings through semantic integration across mainstream CD tasks. This paper identifies two key challenges in fully leveraging LMs in existing work: Misalignment between the training objectives of LMs and CD models creates a distribution gap in feature spaces; A unified framework is essential for integrating textual embeddings across varied CD tasks while preserving the strengths of existing cognitive modeling paradigms to ensure the robustness of embedding enhancement. To address these challenges, this paper introduces EduEmbed, a unified embedding enhancement framework that leverages fine-tuned LMs to enrich learner-item cognitive modeling across diverse CD tasks. EduEmbed operates in two stages. In the first stage, we fine-tune LMs based on role-specific representations and an interaction diagnoser to bridge the semantic gap of CD models. In the second stage, we employ a textual adapter to extract task-relevant semantics and integrate them with existing modeling paradigms to improve generalization. We evaluate the proposed framework on four CD tasks and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) task, achieving robust performance. Further analysis reveals the impact of semantic information across diverse tasks, offering key insights for future research on the application of LMs in CD for online intelligent education systems.

Q-matrices are a cornerstone of theory-driven assessment and learning analytics, making item demands and students' underlying knowledge components and misconceptions explicit and actionable. However, Q-matrices are typically crafted by experts, making them time-consuming to build, prone to subjectivity, and difficult to validate empirically. We propose a framework for human-AI Q-matrix refinement in which large language models (LLMs) generate candidate Q-matrices using structured, misconception-aware prompting, and NeuralCDM provides an empirical evaluation layer to compare candidates based on how well they explain student response data. We apply the framework to a thermodynamics assessment dataset and benchmark locally deployed LLMs against cloud-served models. Results show that iteratively refined LLM-generated Q-matrices can exceed expert-baseline model fit (AUC 0.780 vs. 0.717), and that locally deployed models achieve comparable performance to cloud APIs, supporting privacy-preserving deployment.