Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Knowledge structures construction and learning paths recommendation based on formal contexts

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Knowledge structure is a valid characteristic for assessing individuals’ knowledge and guiding their future learning. Based on formal context, there are methods to construct a knowledge structure delineated by skill function and find learning paths. However, the skill functions considered in these methods are well-formed and the skills are independent. To overcome these limitations, this paper transforms a general skill function into a formal context to extend the methods of constructing knowledge structures and recommending learning paths. The construction method of knowledge structures is discussed based on the quasi-order relation among skills, which is suitable for the situation that skills are not independent. The recommendation method of learning paths is investigated based on the subsequent states and learning complexity of skills, which can realize personalized learning. Moreover, simulation experiments are performed on five data sets and show that it is necessary to consider the quasi-order relation among skills and that the methods proposed for finding and recommending learning paths are feasible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Algorithm 1
Algorithm 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the first author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Anselmi P, Heller J, Stefanutti L, Robusto E (2022) Constructing, improving, and shortening tests for skill assessment. J Math Psychol 106:102621

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Anselmi P, Robusto E, Stefanutti L, de Chiusole D (2016) An upgrading procedure for adaptive assessment of knowledge. Psychometrika 81:461–482

    MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Anselmi P, Stefanutti L, de Chiusole D, Robusto E (2017) The assessment of knowledge and learning in competence spaces: the gain-loss model for dependent skills. Br J Math Stat Psychol 70(3):457–479

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bartl E, Belohlavek R (2011) Knowledge spaces with graded knowledge states. Inf Sci 181(8):1426–1439

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Bellarhmouch Y, Jeghal A, Tairi H, Benjelloun N (2023) A proposed architectural learner model for a personalized learning environment. Educ Inf Technol 28:4243–4263

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brancaccio A, de Chiusole D, Stefanutti L (2022) Algorithms for the adaptive assessment of procedural knowledge and skills. Behav Res Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01998-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Carbone M, Colace F, Lombardi M, Marongiu F, Santaniello D, Valentino C (2021) An adaptive learning path builder based on a context aware recommender system. In: 2021 IEEE frontiers in education conference (FIE), Lincoln, pp 1–5

  8. Cordero P, Enciso M, Mora A, Ojeda-Aciego M, Rossi C (2015) Knowledge discovery in social networks by using a logic-based treatment of implications. Knowl-Based Syst 87:16–25

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cosyn E, Uzun H, Doble C, Matayoshi J (2021) A practical perspective on knowledge space theory: ALEKS and its data. J Math Psychol 101:102512

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. de Chiusole D, Stefanutti L, Anselmi P, Robusto E (2020) Stat-Knowlab. assessment and learning of statistics with competence-based knowledge space theory. Int J Artif Intell Educ 30(4):668–700

    Google Scholar 

  11. Doble C, Matayoshi J, Cosyn E, Uzun H, Karami A (2019) A data-based simulation study of reliability for an adaptive assessment based on knowledge space theory. Int J Artif Intell Educ 29:258–282

    Google Scholar 

  12. Doignon JP (1994) Knowledge spaces and skill assignments. In: Fischer GH, Laming D (eds) Contributions to mathematical psychology, psychometrics, and methodology. Recent Research in Psychology, Springer, New York, pp 111–121

    Google Scholar 

  13. Doignon JP, Falmagne JC (1985) Spaces for the assessment of knowledge. Int J Man-Mach Stud 23(2):175–196

    Google Scholar 

  14. Doignon JP, Falmagne JC (1999) Knowledge spaces. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  15. Doignon JP, Falmagne JC (2011) Learning spaces: interdisciplinary applied mathematics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Duntsch I, Gediga G (1995) Skills and knowledge structures. Br J Math Stat Psychol 48(1):9–27

    Google Scholar 

  17. Duntsch I, Gediga G (2002) Modal-style operators in qualitative data analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE international conference on data mining, Washington. IEEE, pp 155–162

  18. Falmagne JC, Albert D, Doble C, Eppstein D, Hu X (2013) Knowledge spaces: applications in education. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  19. Falmagne JC, Cosyn E, Doignon JP, Thiery N (2003) The assessment of knowledge, in theory and in practice. In: IEMC ’03 proceedings. Managing technologically driven organizations: the human side of innovation and change (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37502), pp 609–615

  20. Fan SQ, Zhang WX, Xu W (2006) Fuzzy inference based on fuzzy concept lattice. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(24):3177–3187

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Ganter B, Wille R (2012) Formal concept analysis: mathematical foundations. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ge X, Lin S (2021) Notes on attribution functions. Br J Math Stat Psychol 74:131–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guo LK, Jia ZH, Li QG, Dai JH (2022) Steadiness analysis of means-end conceptual paths and problem-chains based on concept lattices and similarity measuring. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 13(3):691–719

    Google Scholar 

  24. Guo LK, Jia ZH, Ma GZ, Li JH (2023) An iterative recommendation model of supporting personalized learning based on schematic patterns mining from schema-enhanced contexts of problem-solving. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 14:93–115

    Google Scholar 

  25. Heller J, Stefanutti L, Anselmi P, Robusto E (2015) On the link between cognitive diagnostic models and knowledge space theory. Psychometrika 80:995–1019

    MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Heller J, Steiner C, Hockemeyer C, Albert D (2006) Competence-based knowledge structures for personalised learning. Int J E-Learn 5(1):75–88

    Google Scholar 

  27. Heller J, Ünlü A, Albert D (2013) Skills, competencies and knowledge structures. In: Falmagne JC, Albert D, Doble C, Eppstein D, Hu X (eds) Knowledge spaces: applications in education. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp 229–242

    Google Scholar 

  28. Heller J (2021) Generalizing quasi-ordinal knowledge spaces to polytomous items. J Math Psychol 101:102515

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Hu M, Tsang ECC, Guo Y, Zhang QS, Chen DG, Xu WH (2022) A novel approach to concept-cognitive learning in interval-valued formal contexts: a granular computing viewpoint. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 13(4):1049–1064

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kambouri M, Koppen M, Villano M, Falmagne JC (1994) Knowledge assessment: tapping human expertise by the QUERY routine. Int J Hum Comput Stud 40(1):119–151

    Google Scholar 

  31. Koppen M (1994) The construction of knowledge spaces by querying experts. In: Fischer GH, Laming D (eds) Contributions to mathematical psychology, psychometrics, and methodology recent research in psychology. Springer, New York, pp 137–147

    Google Scholar 

  32. Koppen M, Doignon JP (1990) How to build a knowledge space by querying an expert. J Math Psychol 34(3):311–331

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Li H, Gong R, Zhong Z, Xing LB, Li X, Li HN (2023) Research on personalized learning path planning model based on knowledge network. Neural Comput Appl 35:8809–8821

    Google Scholar 

  34. Li JJ, Li KD, Wu DG (2013) Knowledge system model based on rough set and concept lattice. Science Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  35. Loia V, Orciuoli F, Pedrycz W (2018) Towards a granular computing approach based on formal concept analysis for discovering periodicities in data. Knowl-Based Syst 146:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  36. McCabe TJ (1976) A complexity measure. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 4:308–320

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Muñoz-Merino PJ, Novillo RG, Kloos CD (2018) Assessment of skills and adaptive learning for parametric exercises combining knowledge spaces and item response theory. Appl Soft Comput 68:110–124

    Google Scholar 

  38. Nicotra EF, Spoto A (2019) Connections and dissimilarities among formal concept analysis, knowledge space theory and cognitive diagnostic models in a systemic perspective. In: Minati G, Abram M, Pessa E (eds) Systemics of incompleteness and quasi-systems. Contemporary Systems Thinking, Springer, Cham, pp 235–241

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rusch A, Wille R (1996) Knowledge spaces and formal concept analysis. In: Bock HH, Polasek W (eds) Data analysis and information systems, studies in classification, data analysis, and knowledge organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 427–436

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schrepp M (1997) A generalization of knowledge space theory to problems with more than two answer alternatives. J Math Psychol 41(3):237–243

    MathSciNet  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Spoto A, Stefanutti L (2020) On the necessary and sufficient conditions for delineating forward-and backward-graded knowledge structures from skill maps. J Math Psychol 99:102451

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Spoto A, Stefanutti L, Vidotto G (2010) Knowledge space theory, formal concept analysis, and computerized psychological assessment. Behav Res Methods 42(1):342–350

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Stefanutti L, Anselmi P, de Chiusole D, Spoto A (2020) On the polytomous generalization of knowledge space theory. J Math Psychol 94:102306

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Stefanutti L, de Chiusole D (2017) On the assessment of learning in competence based knowledge space theory. J Math Psychol 80:22–32

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Steiner CM, Albert D, Nussbaumer A (2009) Supporting self-regulated personalised learning through competence-based knowledge space theory. Policy Futures Educ 7(6):645–661

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sun W, Li JJ, Ge X, Lin YD (2021) Knowledge structures delineated by fuzzy skill maps. Fuzzy Sets Syst 47:50–66

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  47. Sun W, Li JJ, Lin FC, He ZR (2023) Constructing polytomous knowledge structures from fuzzy skills. Fuzzy Sets Syst 461:108395

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Wang B, Li JJ, Sun W (2023) CD-polytomous knowledge spaces and corresponding polytomous surmise systems. Br J Math Stat Psychol 76:87–105

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Wang B, Li JJ, Sun W, Luo DZ (2022) Notes on the polytomous generalization of knowledge space theory. J Math Psychol 109:102672

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  50. Wille R (1982) Restructuring lattice theory: an approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In: Rival I (ed) Ordered sets, vol 15. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 445–470

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wille R (2005) Formal concept analysis as mathematical theory of concepts and concept hierarchies. In: Ganter B, Stumme G, Wille R (eds) Formal concept analysis: foundations and applications. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1–33

    Google Scholar 

  52. Wu R, Lin YD (2022) SOLO taxonomy-based knowledge structure with subjective items. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 43(1):265–278

    Google Scholar 

  53. Xu FF, Miao DQ, Yao YY, Wei L (2009) Analyzing skill sets with or-relation tables in knowledge spaces. In: 2009 8th IEEE international conference on cognitive informatics, Hong Kong, pp 174–180

  54. Yao YY (2004) A comparative study of formal concept analysis and rough set theory in data analysis. In: Tsumoto S, Słowiński R, Komorowski J, Grzymała-Busse JW (eds) Rough sets and current trends in computing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 56–68

    Google Scholar 

  55. Yao YY (2004) Concept lattices in rough set theory. In: IEEE annual meeting of the fuzzy information, processing NAFIPS ’04, vol 02, pp 796–801

  56. Yao YY, Miao DQ, Xu FF (2009) Granular structures and approximations in rough sets and knowledge spaces. In: Abraham A, Falcón R, Bello R (eds) Rough set theory: a true landmark in data analysis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 71–84

    Google Scholar 

  57. Yin WH (2021) Adaptive testing based on knowledge space theory. In: 2021 international conference on cyber security intelligence and analytics (CSIA2021), vol 1. Springer, pp 416–421

  58. Zhang T, Rong M, Shan H, Liu M (2022) Stability analysis of incremental concept tree for concept cognitive learning. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 13(1):11–28

    Google Scholar 

  59. Zhang WX, Qiu GF (2005) Uncertain decision making based on rough sets. Tsinghua University Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  60. Zhi HL, Li JH (2018) Influence of dynamical changes on concept lattice and implication rules. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 9(5):795–805

    Google Scholar 

  61. Zhong L, Wei YT, Yao H, Deng W, Wang ZF, Tong MW (2020) Review of deep learning-based personalized learning recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 2020 11th international conference on e-education, E-business, E-management, and E-learning (IC4E 2020), New York, pp 145–149

  62. Zhou YF, Li JJ, Feng DL, Yang TL (2021) Learning paths and skills assessment in formal context. Pattern Recognit Artif Intell 34(12):1069–1084

    Google Scholar 

  63. Zhou YF, Li JJ, Wang HK, Sun W (2022) Skills and fuzzy knowledge structures. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 42(3):2629–2645

    Google Scholar 

  64. Zhou YF, Li JJ, Yang HL, Xu QY, Zhou YL (2023) Knowledge structure construction and skill reduction methods based on multi-scale context. J Exp Theor Artif Intell. https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2023.2183266

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the reviewers and editors for their constructive comments and helpful suggestions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11871259, 12271191, 12171293, 62076221), the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province (Nos. 2022J01306 and 2022J05169) and the Excellent Graduate Training Program of Shaanxi Normal University (No. LHRCTS23060).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an, 710119, China

    Yinfeng Zhou & Hailong Yang

  2. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Minnan Normal University, Zhangzhou, 363000, China

    Jinjin Li, Taoli Yang & Danlu Feng

  3. School of Computer Science, Minnan Normal University, Zhangzhou, 363000, China

    Qingyuan Xu

Authors
  1. Yinfeng Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jinjin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hailong Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Qingyuan Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Taoli Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Danlu Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jinjin Li or Hailong Yang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

The symbols commonly used in this paper are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6 Symbols commonly used in this paper
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhou, Y., Li, J., Yang, H. et al. Knowledge structures construction and learning paths recommendation based on formal contexts. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 15, 1605–1620 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-023-01985-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-023-01985-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation