ArticleEducational and psychological measurement2025
Using Deep Reinforcement Learning to Decide Test Length.
Article in Educational and psychological measurement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explored the application of deep reinforcement learning (DRL) as an innovative approach to optimize test length. The primary focus was to evaluate whether the current length of the National Board of Chiropractic Examiners Part I Exam is justified. By modeling the problem as a combinatorial optimization task within a Markov Decision Process framework, an algorithm capable of constructing test forms from a finite set of items while adhering to critical structural constraints, such as content representation and item difficulty distribution, was used. The findings reveal that although the DRL algorithm was successful in identifying shorter test forms that maintained comparable ability estimation accuracy, the existing test length of 240 items remains advisable as we found shorter test forms did not maintain structural constraints. Furthermore, the study highlighted the inherent adaptability of DRL to continuously learn about a test-taker's latent abilities and dynamically adjust to their response patterns, making it well-suited for personalized testing environments. This dynamic capability supports real-time decision-making in item selection, improving both efficiency and precision in ability estimation. Future research is encouraged to focus on expanding the item bank and leveraging advanced computational resources to enhance the algorithm's search capacity for shorter, structurally compliant test forms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.