Hierarchical Aggregation of Local Explanations for Student Adaptability
Source abstract
Abstract
In this study, we present Hierarchical Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (H-LIME), an innovative extension of the LIME technique that provides interpretable machine learning insights across multiple levels of data hierarchy. While traditional local explanation methods focus on instance-level attributions, they often overlook systemic patterns embedded within educational structures. To address this limitation, H-LIME aggregates local explanations across hierarchical layers, Institution Type, Location, and Educational Level, thereby linking individual predictions to broader, policy-relevant trends. We evaluate H-LIME on a student adaptability dataset using a Random Forest model chosen for its superior explanation stability (approximately 4.5 times more stable than Decision Trees). The framework uncovers consistent global predictors of adaptability, such as education level and class duration, while revealing subgroup-specific factors, including network type and financial condition, whose influence varies across hierarchical contexts. This work demonstrates the effectiveness of H-LIME at uncovering multi-level patterns in educational data and its potential for supporting targeted interventions, strategic planning, and evidence-based decision-making. Beyond education, the hierarchical approach offers a scalable solution for enhancing interpretability in domains where structured data relationships are essential.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Online Learning and Analytics · Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The University of Aizu, Aizuwakamatsu 965-8580, Fukushima, Japan
References (52)
Show source-provided references
1. Chitti, M., Chitti, P., and Jayabalan, M. (2020, January 14–17). Need for interpretable student performance prediction. Proceedings of the 2020 13th International Conference on Developments in eSystems Engineering (DeSE), Liverpool, UK.10.1109/DeSE51703.2020.9450735 ↗
2. Guo, Y., Gunay, C., Tangirala, S., Kerven, D., Jin, W., Savage, J.C., and Lee, S. (2022). Identifying Critical LMS Features for Predicting At-risk Students. arXiv.
3. Explainable artificial intelligence in education10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100074 ↗
4. Explainable student performance prediction models: A systematic review10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3061368 ↗
5. Holliman, A.J., Collie, R.J., and Martin, A.J. (2019). Adaptability and academic development. The Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.10.1002/9781119171492.wecad420 ↗
6. Learning in an era of uncertainty in Singapore: Diversity, lifelong learning, inspiration and paradigm shift10.1007/s10671-023-09348-1 ↗
7. Adaptability favors positive academic responses and posttraumatic growth under COVID-19: A longitudinal study with adolescents10.1007/s10212-022-00667-0 ↗
8. Nnadi, L.C., Watanobe, Y., Rahman, M.M., and John-Otumu, A.M. (2024). Prediction of Students’ Adaptability Using Explainable AI in Educational Machine Learning Models. Appl. Sci., 14.10.20944/preprints202405.0933.v1 ↗
9. Unpacking the “Black Box” of AI in education
10. Swamy, V., Radmehr, B., Krco, N., Marras, M., and Käser, T. (2022). Evaluating the explainers: Black-box explainable machine learning for student success prediction in MOOCs. arXiv.10.1145/3491140.3528273 ↗
11. Personalized education and artificial intelligence in the United States, China, and India: A systematic review using a human-in-the-loop model10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100068 ↗
12. Developing personalized education: A dynamic framework10.1007/s10648-020-09570-w ↗
13. Goethals, S., Martens, D., and Evgeniou, T. (2023, January 18–22). Manipulation risks in explainable ai: The implications of the disagreement problem. Proceedings of the Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, Turin, Italy.
14. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). “Why should i trust you?” Explaining the predictions of any classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗
15. Laugel, T., Renard, X., Lesot, M.J., Marsala, C., and Detyniecki, M. (2018). Defining locality for surrogates in post-hoc interpretablity. arXiv.
16. LIMEcraft: Handcrafted superpixel selection and inspection for Visual eXplanations10.1007/s10994-022-06204-w ↗
17. The possibilities and limits of XAI in education: A socio-technical perspective10.1080/17439884.2023.2185630 ↗
18. Visualizing the effects of predictor variables in black box supervised learning models10.1111/rssb.12377 ↗
19. McKee, G.J., and Miljkovic, D. (2007, January 29). Data Aggregation and Information Loss. Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Meeting, Portland, OR, USA.
20. Fairness-aware large-scale collective opinion generation paradigm: A case study of evaluating blockchain adoption barriers in medical supply chain10.1016/j.ins.2023.03.135 ↗
21. Assessing spatial synergy between integrated urban rail transit system and urban form: A BULI-based MCLSGA model with the wisdom of crowds10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3185680 ↗
22. A data-driven benchmarking framework for enhancing sustainability performance in UI GreenMetric rankings: Insights from Saudi Arabian higher education institutions
23. An examination of the effects of demographic factors on organizational commitment: Data from North Indian higher education10.56578/jorit040401 ↗
24. Assessment of the experiences of higher education institution on online learning: The case of some selected institutions
25. Christoph, M. (2020). Interpretable Machine Learning: A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable, Leanpub.
26. Ochoa, X. (2016, January 3–7). Adaptive multilevel clustering model for the prediction of academic risk. Proceedings of the 2016 XI Latin American Conference on Learning Objects and Technology (LACLO), San Carlos, Costa Rica.10.1109/LACLO.2016.7751800 ↗
27. From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9 ↗
28. Yang, Z., Yang, D., Dyer, C., He, X., Smola, A., and Hovy, E. (2016, January 12–17). Hierarchical attention networks for document classification. Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, San Diego, CA, USA.10.18653/v1/N16-1174 ↗
29. MIMIC-EYE: A Secure and Explainable Multi-Modal Deep Learning Framework for Clinical Decision Support
30. International Journal of Energy Production and Management
31. Solar energy harvesting and storage optimization using machine learning
32. Tiwari, R.G., Jain, A.K., Kukreja, V., and Ujjwal, N. (2022, January 25–26). Education 4.0: Explainable machine learning for classification of student adaptability. Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Data Analytics for Business and Industry (ICDABI), Sakhir, Bahrain.10.1109/ICDABI56818.2022.10041636 ↗
33. Suzan, M.H., Samrin, N.A., Biswas, A.A., and Pramanik, A. (2021, January 6–8). Students’ Adaptability Level Prediction in Online Education using Machine Learning Approaches. Proceedings of the 2021 12th International Conference on Computing Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), Kharagpur, India.
34. Student adaptability, emotions, and achievement: Navigating new academic terrains in a global crisis10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102046 ↗
35. Zhang, K., Wu, S., Xu, Y., Cao, W., Goetz, T., and Parks-Stamm, E.J. (2021). Adaptability promotes student engagement under COVID-19: The multiple mediating effects of academic emotion. Front. Psychol., 11.10.3389/fpsyg.2020.633265 ↗
36. Pedreschi, D., Giannotti, F., Guidotti, R., Monreale, A., Pappalardo, L., Ruggieri, S., and Turini, F. (2018). Open the black box data-driven explanation of black box decision systems. arXiv.10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019780 ↗
37. Explainability for large language models: A survey
38. Nnadi, L.C., Ding, D., Muepu, D.M., Amin, M.F.I., and Kabir, R. (2025, January 1–4). Interpretable Machine Learning for Predicting and Explaining Code Submission Outcomes in an Online Judge System. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial, Engineering and Other Applications of Applied Intelligent Systems, Kytakyushu, Japan.10.1007/978-981-96-8892-0_7 ↗
39. Augmenting interpretable models with large language models during training10.1038/s41467-023-43713-1 ↗
40. Yadav, G., Tseng, Y.J., and Ni, X. (2023). Contextualizing problems to student interests at scale in intelligent tutoring system using large language models. arXiv.
41. Integrating LA and EDM for improving students Success in higher Education using FCN algorithm10.1155/2022/7690103 ↗
42. Hierarchical data structures and multilevel modeling10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.05.042 ↗
43. Lengerich, B.J., Bordt, S., Nori, H., Nunnally, M.E., Aphinyanaphongs, Y., Kellis, M., and Caruana, R. (2023). LLMs understand glass-box models, discover surprises, and suggest repairs. arXiv.
44. Bennetot, A., Donadello, I., Qadi, A.E., Dragoni, M., Frossard, T., Wagner, B., Saranti, A., Tulli, S., Trocan, M., and Chatila, R. (2021). A practical guide on explainable ai techniques applied on biomedical use case applications. arXiv.10.2139/ssrn.4229624 ↗
45. Keller, N., Jenny, M.A., Spies, C.A., and Herzog, S.M. (December, January 30). Augmenting decision competence in healthcare using AI-based cognitive models. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI), Oldenburg, Germany.10.1109/ICHI48887.2020.9374376 ↗
46. Lundberg, S. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. arXiv.
47. Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley values10.1016/j.artint.2021.103502 ↗
48. Gurumoorthy, K.S., Dhurandhar, A., Cecchi, G., and Aggarwal, C. (2019, January 8–11). Efficient data representation by selecting prototypes with importance weights. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), Beijing, China.10.1109/ICDM.2019.00036 ↗
49. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2018, January 2–7). Anchors: High-precision model-agnostic explanations. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11491 ↗
50. Suzan, M.H., and Samrin, N.A. (2022). Students Adaptability Level in Online Education, Kaggle.
51. Lundberg, S., and Lee, S.I. (2016). An unexpected unity among methods for interpreting model predictions. arXiv.
52. Explainable AI and machine learning: Performance evaluation and explainability of classifiers on educational data mining inspired career counseling10.1007/s10639-022-11221-2 ↗