@article {10,
	title = {Constructing rotating item pools for constrained adaptive testing},
	journal = {Journal of Educational Measurement},
	volume = {41},
	number = {4},
	year = {2004},
	pages = {345-359},
	publisher = {Blackwell Publishing: United Kingdom},
	abstract = {Preventing items in adaptive testing from being over- or underexposed is one of the main problems in computerized adaptive testing. Though the problem of overexposed items can be solved using a probabilistic item-exposure control method, such methods are unable to deal with the problem of underexposed items. Using a system of rotating item pools, on the other hand, is a method that potentially solves both problems. In this method, a master pool is divided into (possibly overlapping) smaller item pools, which are required to have similar distributions of content and statistical attributes. These pools are rotated among the testing sites to realize desirable exposure rates for the items. A test assembly model, motivated by Gulliksen{\textquoteright}s matched random subtests method, was explored to help solve the problem of dividing a master pool into a set of smaller pools. Different methods to solve the model are proposed. An item pool from the Law School Admission Test was used to evaluate the performances of computerized adaptive tests from systems of rotating item pools constructed using these methods. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)},
	keywords = {computerized adaptive tests, constrained adaptive testing, item exposure, rotating item pools},
	isbn = {0022-0655 (Print)},
	author = {Ariel, A. and Veldkamp, B. P. and van der Linden, W. J.}
}
@article {407,
	title = {Using response times to detect aberrant responses in computerized adaptive testing},
	journal = {Psychometrika},
	volume = {68},
	number = {2},
	year = {2003},
	pages = {251-265},
	abstract = {A lognormal model for response times is used to check response times for aberrances in examinee behavior on computerized adaptive tests. Both classical procedures and Bayesian posterior predictive checks are presented. For a fixed examinee, responses and response times are independent; checks based on response times offer thus information independent of the results of checks on response patterns. Empirical examples of the use of classical and Bayesian checks for detecting two different types of aberrances in response times are presented. The detection rates for the Bayesian checks outperformed those for the classical checks, but at the cost of higher false-alarm rates. A guideline for the choice between the two types of checks is offered.},
	keywords = {Adaptive Testing, Behavior, Computer Assisted Testing, computerized adaptive testing, Models, person Fit, Prediction, Reaction Time},
	author = {van der Linden, W. J. and van Krimpen-Stoop, E. M. L. A.}
}
