ArticlePsychometrika2023
Generic Identifiability of the DINA Model and Blessing of Latent Dependence.
Article in Psychometrika, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ConstructivePsychometrika · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive diagnostic models are a powerful family of fine-grained discrete latent variable models in psychometrics. Within this family, the DINA model is a fundamental and parsimonious one that has received significant attention. Similar to other complex latent variable models, identifiability is an important issue for CDMs, including the DINA model. Gu and Xu (Psychometrika 84(2):468-483, 2019) established the necessary and sufficient conditions for strict identifiability of the DINA model. Despite being the strongest possible notion of identifiability, strict identifiability may impose overly stringent requirements on designing the cognitive diagnostic tests. This work studies a slightly weaker yet very useful notion, generic identifiability, which means parameters are identifiable almost everywhere in the parameter space, excluding only a negligible subset of measure zero. We propose transparent generic identifiability conditions for the DINA model, relaxing existing conditions in nontrivial ways. Under generic identifiability, we also explicitly characterize the forms of the measure-zero sets where identifiability breaks down. In addition, we reveal an interesting blessing-of-latent-dependence phenomenon under DINA-that is, dependence between the latent attributes can restore identifiability under some otherwise unidentifiable [Formula: see text]-matrix designs. The blessing of latent dependence provides useful practical implications and reassurance for real-world designs of cognitive diagnostic assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36167947What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.