Interpretable Knowledge Tracing via Transformer-Bayesian Hybrid Networks: Learning Temporal Dependencies and Causal Structures in Educational Data
Source abstract
Abstract
Knowledge tracing, the computational modeling of student learning progression through sequential educational interactions, represents a critical component for adaptive learning systems and personalized education platforms. However, existing approaches face a fundamental trade-off between predictive accuracy and interpretability: deep sequence models excel at capturing complex temporal dependencies in student interaction data but lack transparency in their decision-making processes, while probabilistic graphical models provide interpretable causal relationships but struggle with the complexity of real-world educational sequences. We propose a hybrid architecture that integrates transformer-based sequence modeling with structured Bayesian causal networks to overcome this limitation. Our dual-pathway design employs a transformer encoder to capture complex temporal patterns in student interaction sequences, while a differentiable Bayesian network explicitly models prerequisite relationships between knowledge components. These pathways are unified through a cross-attention mechanism that enables bidirectional information flow between temporal representations and causal structures. We introduce a joint training objective that simultaneously optimizes sequence prediction accuracy and causal graph consistency, ensuring learned temporal patterns align with interpretable domain knowledge. The model undergoes pre-training on 3.2 million student–problem interactions from diverse MOOCs to establish foundational representations, followed by domain-specific fine-tuning. Comprehensive experiments across mathematics, computer science, and language learning demonstrate substantial improvements: 8.7% increase in AUC over state-of-the-art knowledge tracing models (0.847 vs. 0.779), 12.3% reduction in RMSE for performance prediction, and 89.2% accuracy in discovering expert-validated prerequisite relationships. The model achieves a 0.763 F1-score for early at-risk student identification, outperforming baselines by 15.4%. This work demonstrates that sophisticated temporal modeling and interpretable causal reasoning can be effectively unified for educational applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning · Topic Modeling · Online Learning and Analytics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Moving through MOOCs: Understanding the progression of users in massive open online courses10.3102/0013189X14562423 ↗
2. Connecting performance to social structure and pedagogy as a pathway to scaling learning analytics in MOOCs: An exploratory study10.1111/jcal.12129 ↗
3. Trabelsi, Z., Alnajjar, F., Parambil, M.M.A., Gochoo, M., and Ali, L. (2023). Real-time attention monitoring system for classroom: A deep learning approach for student’s behavior recognition. Big Data Cogn. Comput., 7.10.3390/bdcc7010048 ↗
4. Habib Albohamood, A., Alqattan, M.S., and Vizcarra, C.P. (2025, January 13–14). Real-time Student Engagement Monitoring in Classroom Environments using Machine Learning and Computer Vision. Proceedings of the 2025 4th International Conference on Computing and Information Technology (ICCIT), Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.10.1109/ICCIT63348.2025.10989406 ↗
5. Improving performance of smart education systems by integrating machine learning on edge devices and cloud in educational institutions10.1007/s10723-024-09755-5 ↗
6. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge10.1007/BF01099821 ↗
7. Item response theory10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033702 ↗
8. Bayesian knowledge tracing, logistic models, and beyond: An overview of learner modeling techniques10.1007/s11257-017-9193-2 ↗
9. Deep knowledge tracing
10. Pandey, S., and Karypis, G. (2019). A self-attentive model for knowledge tracing. arXiv.
11. Zhang, J., Shi, X., King, I., and Yeung, D.Y. (2017, January 3–7). Dynamic key-value memory networks for knowledge tracing. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web, Perth, Australia.10.1145/3038912.3052580 ↗
12. Nakagawa, H., Iwasawa, Y., and Matsuo, Y. (2019, January 14–17). Graph-based knowledge tracing: Modeling student proficiency using graph neural network. Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/aCM International Conference on Web Intelligence, Thessaloniki, Greece.10.1145/3350546.3352513 ↗
13. When is deep learning the best approach to knowledge tracing?
14. Attention is all you need
15. Yue, W., Su, W., Liu, L., Cai, C., Yuan, Y., Jia, Z., Liu, J., and Xie, W. (2024). A pre-trained knowledge tracing model with limited data. International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-68309-1_14 ↗
16. Wang, J., Xie, H., Au, O.T.S., Zou, D., and Wang, F.L. (2020, January 24–27). Attention-based CNN for personalized course recommendations for MOOC learners. Proceedings of the 2020 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), Bangkok, Thailand.10.1109/ISET49818.2020.00047 ↗
17. Ma, Q. (2024). Utilization of transformer model in multimodal data fusion learning: Cross-modal knowledge transfer in the new generation learning space. Intell. Decis. Technol.10.3233/IDT-240169 ↗
18. An automated essay scoring systems: A systematic literature review10.1007/s10462-021-10068-2 ↗
19. Abdelrahman, G., and Wang, Q. (2019, January 21–25). Knowledge tracing with sequential key-value memory networks. Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Paris, France.10.1145/3331184.3331195 ↗
20. Pearl, J. (2014). Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference, Elsevier.
21. Koller, D., and Friedman, N. (2009). Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques, MIT Press.
22. A review of recent advances in learner and skill modeling in intelligent learning environments10.1007/s11257-011-9106-8 ↗
23. Beck, J.E., and Chang, K.-m. (2007). Identifiability: A fundamental problem of student modeling. International Conference on User Modeling, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-73078-1_17 ↗
24. Rasch, G. (1960). Studies in Mathematical Psychology: I. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Danish Institute for Educational Research.
25. Lord, F.M., and Novick, M.R. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores, Addison-Wesley.
26. 18 Multidimensional item response theory10.1016/S0169-7161(06)26018-8 ↗
27. Pavlik, P.I., Cen, H., and Koedinger, K.R. (2009). Performance factors analysis—A new alternative to knowledge tracing. Artificial Intelligence in Education, Ios Press.
28. Cen, H., Koedinger, K., and Junker, B. (2006). Learning factors analysis—A general method for cognitive model evaluation and improvement. International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Springer.10.1007/11774303_17 ↗
29. Khajah, M., Lindsey, R.V., and Mozer, M.C. (2016). How deep is knowledge tracing?. arXiv.
30. Choi, Y., Lee, Y., Cho, J., Baek, J., Kim, B., Cha, Y., Shin, D., Bae, C., and Heo, J. (2020, January 12–14). Towards an appropriate query, key, and value computation for knowledge tracing. Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale, Virtual.10.1145/3386527.3405945 ↗
31. Pu, S., Yudelson, M., Ou, L., and Huang, Y. (2020). Deep knowledge tracing with transformers. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_46 ↗
32. Li, Z., Xue, Z., Liu, C., and Feng, Y. (2023, January 12–14). Deep Knowledge Tracing Model with an Evolved Transformer Structure. Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 12th Data Driven Control and Learning Systems Conference (DDCLS), Xiangtan, China.10.1109/DDCLS58216.2023.10167354 ↗
33. Ghosh, A., Heffernan, N., and Lan, A.S. (2020, January 6–10). Context-aware attentive knowledge tracing. Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, Virtual.10.1145/3394486.3403282 ↗
34. Liu, Z., Liu, Q., Chen, J., Huang, S., and Luo, W. (2023). simpleKT: A simple but tough-to-beat baseline for knowledge tracing. arXiv.
35. Wang, Z., Zhou, J., Chen, Q., Zhang, M., Jiang, B., Zhou, A., Bai, Q., and He, L. (2025). LLM-KT: Aligning Large Language Models with Knowledge Tracing using a Plug-and-Play Instruction. arXiv.10.2139/ssrn.5231679 ↗
36. Park, S., and Kim, H. (2025). A Comprehensive Survey and Taxonomy on Large Language Model-Based Knowledge Tracing. International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-98281-1_20 ↗
37. Wang, D., Chen, G., and Lu, Y. (2025). Fine-Tuning Large Language Models for Knowledge Tracing Harnessing Insights from Explainable AI. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-99261-2_27 ↗
38. Yang, C., Zhu, Y., Lu, W., Wang, Y., Chen, Q., Gao, C., Yan, B., and Chen, Y. (2024). Survey on knowledge distillation for large language models: Methods, evaluation, and application. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.10.1145/3699518 ↗
39. Lee, U., Bae, J., Kim, D., Lee, S., Park, J., Ahn, T., Lee, G., Stratton, D., and Kim, H. (2024). Language model can do knowledge tracing: Simple but effective method to integrate language model and knowledge tracing task. arXiv.
40. Integrating fine-grained attention into multi-task learning for knowledge tracing10.1007/s11280-023-01190-y ↗
41. Gao, R., Ni, Q., and Hu, B. (2024, January 28–30). Fairness of large language models in education. Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Intelligent Education and Computer Technology, Guilin, China.10.1145/3687311.3687404 ↗
42. Pearl, J. (2009). Causality, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803161 ↗
43. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C.N., and Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, Prediction, and Search, MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/1754.001.0001 ↗
44. Optimal structure identification with greedy search
45. Probabilistic assessment of user’s emotions in educational games10.1080/08839510290030390 ↗
46. Murphy, K.P. (2002). Dynamic Bayesian Networks: Representation, Inference and Learning, University of California.
47. Zheng, X., Aragam, B., Ravikumar, P.K., and Xing, E.P. (2018). Dags with no tears: Continuous optimization for structure learning. arXiv.
48. Addressing the assessment challenge with an online system that tutors as it assesses10.1007/s11257-009-9063-7 ↗
49. Choi, Y., Lee, Y., Shin, D., Cho, J., Park, S., Lee, S., Baek, J., Bae, C., Kim, B., and Heo, J. (2020, January 6–10). Ednet: A large-scale hierarchical dataset in education. Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence in Education: 21st International Conference, AIED 2020, Ifrane, Morocco. Proceedings, Part II 21.10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_13 ↗
50. The 2010 KDD Cup Competition Dataset: Engaging the machine learning community in predictive learning analytics10.18608/jla.2016.32.16 ↗