Preprint

The DOI matches its DataCite record; its reference list is not available.

Automated Knowledge Component Generation for Interpretable Knowledge Tracing in Coding Problems

Duan, Zhangqi, Fernandez, Nigel, Narayanan, Arun Balajiee Lekshmi, Hassany, Mohammad, de Alencar, Rafaella Sampaio, Brusilovsky, Peter, Akram, Bita, Lan, Andrew·2025·arXiv

Abstract

Knowledge components (KCs) mapped to problems help model student learning, tracking their mastery levels on fine-grained skills thereby facilitating personalized learning and feedback in online learning platforms. However, crafting and tagging KCs to problems, traditionally performed by human domain experts, is highly labor intensive. We present an automated, LLM-based pipeline for KC generation and tagging for open-ended programming problems. We also develop an LLM-based knowledge tracing (KT) framework to leverage these LLM-generated KCs, which we refer to as KCGen-KT. We conduct extensive quantitative and qualitative evaluations on two real-world student code submission datasets in different programming languages.We find that KCGen-KT outperforms existing KT methods and human-written KCs on future student response prediction. We investigate the learning curves of generated KCs and show that LLM-generated KCs result in a better fit than human written KCs under a cognitive model. We also conduct a human evaluation with course instructors to show that our pipeline generates reasonably accurate problem-KC mappings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2502.18632

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No DOI on record — the citation lists can’t be looked up.

Metadata

Authors
Duan, Z., Fernandez, N., Narayanan, A. B. L., Hassany, M., de Alencar, R. S., Brusilovsky, P., Akram, B., & Lan, A.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
Type
Preprint

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review