journal article·2025-04-26Open access

A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance Prediction: Evaluating Optimized Deep Learning Ensembles Against Semi-Supervised Feature Selection-Based Models

Jose Antonio Lagares Rodríguez, Norberto Díaz-Díaz, Carlos David Barranco González

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 9

Abstract

Advancements in modern technology have significantly increased the availability of educational data, presenting researchers with new challenges in extracting meaningful insights. Educational Data Mining offers analytical methods to support the prediction of student outcomes, development of intelligent tutoring systems, and curriculum optimization. Prior studies have highlighted the potential of semi-supervised approaches that incorporate feature selection to identify factors influencing academic success, particularly for improving model interpretability and predictive performance. Many feature selection methods tend to exclude variables that may not be individually powerful predictors but can collectively provide significant information, thereby constraining a model’s capabilities in learning environments. In contrast, Deep Learning (DL) models paired with Automated Machine Learning techniques can decrease the reliance on manual feature engineering, thereby enabling automatic fine-tuning of numerous model configurations. In this study, we propose a reproducible methodology that integrates DL with AutoML to evaluate student performance. We compared the proposed DL methodology to a semi-supervised approach originally introduced by Yu et al. under the same evaluation criteria. Our results indicate that DL-based models can provide a flexible, data-driven approach for examining student outcomes, in addition to preserving the importance of feature selection for interpretability. This proposal is available for replication and additional research.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Online Learning and Analytics · Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques · Machine Learning and Data Classification

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Computer Science, Intelligent Data Analysis Group (DATAi), Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain

Funding

PAIDI: Intelligent Data Analysis (TIC 239) · Cátedra de Educación en Tecnologías Emergentes, Gamificación e Inteligencia Artificial (EduEmer)

References (54)

Show source-provided references
1. Educational Data Mining: A Review of the State of the Art10.1109/TSMCC.2010.2053532 ↗
2. Educational data mining applications and tasks: A survey of the last 10 years10.1007/s10639-017-9616-z ↗
3. Data Mining in Education10.1002/widm.1075 ↗
4. Analysis of artificial intelligence chatbots and satisfaction for learning in mathematics education
5. Ahmed, M.R., Tahid, S., Mitu, N.A., Kundu, P., and Yeasmin, S. (2020, January 1–3). A comprehensive analysis on undergraduate student academic performance using feature selection techniques on classification algorithms. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), Kharagpur, India.10.1109/ICCCNT49239.2020.9225341 ↗
6. Zhu, X. (2009). Semi-Supervised Learning Literature Survey, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Technical Report 1530.
7. A survey on semi-supervised learning10.1007/s10994-019-05855-6 ↗
8. An Introduction to Variable and Feature Selection
9. A survey on feature selection methods10.1016/j.compeleceng.2013.11.024 ↗
10. Deep Learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
11. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., and Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning, MIT Press.
12. Representation Learning: A Review and New Perspectives10.1109/TPAMI.2013.50 ↗
13. Hutter, F., Kotthoff, L., and Vanschoren, J. (2019). Automated Machine Learning: Methods, Systems, Challenges, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-05318-5 ↗
14. Automl: A survey of the state-of-the-art10.1016/j.knosys.2020.106622 ↗
15. Efficient and Robust Automated Machine Learning
16. Vanschoren, J. (2018). Meta-Learning: A Survey. arXiv.10.1007/978-3-030-05318-5_2 ↗
17. Amrieh, E.A., Hamtini, T., and Aljarah, I. (2015, January 3–5). Preprocessing and analyzing educational data set using X-API for improving student’s performance. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Jordan Conference on Applied Electrical Engineering and Computing Technologies, Amman, Jordan.10.1109/AEECT.2015.7360581 ↗
18. Experience API: Flexible, Decentralized and Activity-Centric Data Collection10.1007/s10758-015-9260-x ↗
19. Yu, S., Cai, Y., Pan, B., and Leung, M.F. (2024). Semi-Supervised Feature Selection of Educational Data Mining for Student Performance Analysis. Electronics, 13.10.3390/electronics13030659 ↗
20. Modeling the Relationship among Digital Demographic Characteristics, Digital Literacy, and Academic Performance of Mathematics Major Students in an Online Learning Environment
21. An ontology-based framework of assessment analytics for massive learning10.1002/cae.22155 ↗
22. Characteristics of data mining by classification educational dataset to improve student’s evaluation
23. Al Fanah, M., and Ansari, M.A. (2019, January 9–12). Understanding e-learners’ behavior using data mining techniques. Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Big Data, Angeles, CA, USA.10.1145/3322134.3322145 ↗
24. Review on publicly available datasets for educational data mining10.1002/widm.1403 ↗
25. Panda, M., and AlQaheri, H. (2022). An education process mining framework: Unveiling meaningful information for understanding students’ learning behavior and improving teaching quality. Information, 13.10.3390/info13010029 ↗
26. Mohammad, A.S., Al-Kaltakchi, M.T.S., and Al-Ani, J.A. (2023). Comprehensive evaluations of student performance estimation via machine learning. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11143153 ↗
27. Erickson, N., Mueller, J., Deng, H., Guo, A., Li, M., Smola, A., and Zhang, Z. (2020). AutoGluon-Tabular: Robust and Accurate AutoML for Structured Data. arXiv.
28. Ferreira, L., Pilastri, A., Martins, C.M., Pires, P.M., and Cortez, P. (2021, January 18–22). A comparison of AutoML tools for machine learning, deep learning and XGBoost. Proceedings of the 2021 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Virtual.10.1109/IJCNN52387.2021.9534091 ↗
29. Olson, R.S., Urbanowicz, R.J., Andrews, P.C., Lavender, N.A., Kidd, L.C., and Moore, J.H. (2016). Chapter Automating Biomedical Data Science Through Tree-Based Pipeline Optimization. Applications of Evolutionary Computation: 19th European Conference, EvoApplications 2016, Porto, Portugal, 30 March–1 April 2016, Springer International Publishing. Proceedings, Part I.
30. Scaling tree-based automated machine learning to biomedical big data with a feature set selector10.1093/bioinformatics/btz470 ↗
31. Olson, R.S., Bartley, N., Urbanowicz, R.J., and Moore, J.H. (2016, January 20–24). Evaluation of a Tree-based Pipeline Optimization Tool for Automating Data Science. Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2016, GECCO ’16, Denver, CO, USA.10.1145/2908812.2908918 ↗
32. LeDell, E., and Poirier, S. (2020, January 12–18). H2O AutoML: Scalable Automatic Machine Learning. Proceedings of the 7th ICML Workshop on Automated Machine Learning (AutoML), Vienna, Austria.
33. Automatic tuning of hyperparameters using Bayesian optimization10.1007/s12530-020-09345-2 ↗
34. Random search for hyper-parameter optimization
35. A survey on ensemble learning10.1007/s11704-019-8208-z ↗
36. Jain, A., Kumar, A., and Susan, S. (2021, January 17–19). Evaluating deep neural network ensembles by majority voting cum meta-learning scheme. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Advances in Signal Processing and Artificial Intelligence, Porto, Portugal.10.1007/978-981-16-1249-7_4 ↗
37. A weight-adjusted voting algorithm for ensembles of classifiers10.1016/j.jkss.2011.03.002 ↗
38. Neural network ensemble strategies for financial decision applications10.1016/j.cor.2004.03.017 ↗
39. Ensembling neural networks: Many could be better than all10.1016/S0004-3702(02)00190-X ↗
40. Ensemble deep learning: A review10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105151 ↗
41. An optimized ensemble prediction model using AutoML based on soft voting classifier for network intrusion detection10.1016/j.jnca.2022.103560 ↗
42. Dietterich, T. (2000). Ensemble methods in machine learning. Multiple Classifier Systems. MCS 2000, Springer.10.1007/3-540-45014-9_1 ↗
43. Witten, I.H., Frank, E., Hall, M.A., and Pal, C.J. (2016). Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, Morgan Kaufman. [4th ed.].
44. Baeza-Yates, R., and Ribeiro-Neto, B. (1999). Modern Information Retrieval, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley.
45. Manning, C.D., Raghavan, P., and Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to Information Retrieval, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511809071 ↗
46. van Rijsbergen, C.J. (1979). Information Retrieval, Butterworth-Heinemann.
47. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 ↗
48. An introduction to ROC analysis10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010 ↗
49. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for evaluating diagnostic tests and predictive models10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.594929 ↗
50. (1908). Student. The probable error of a mean. Biometrika, 6, 1–25.10.2307/2331554 ↗
51. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., and McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP. arXiv.10.18653/v1/P19-1355 ↗
52. Patterson, D., Gonzalez, J., Le, Q.V., Liang, C., Munguia, L.M., Rothchild, D., and Dean, J. (2021). Carbon Emissions and Large Neural Network Training. arXiv.
53. Energy-Efficient Deep Learning Model Compression: A Survey