Advertisement

Circsim-tutor: An intelligent tutoring system for circulatory physiology

  • Nakhoon Kim
  • Martha Evens
  • Joel A. Michael
  • Allen A. Rovick
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 360)

Abstract

The aim of this research is to develop an intelligent tutoring system (ITS) which teaches students the causal relationships between the components of the circulatory physiology system and the complex behavior of the negative feedback system that stabilizes blood pressure. This system will accept natural language input from students and generate limited natural language explanations. It contains rules that identify the student's errors and build a “bug-based” student model. It uses tutoring rules to plan each response based on its model of the student and the dialog history so that it can tailor the dialog to fit the student's learning needs. The tutoring rule interpreter manages the dialog and determines strategy and tactics to achieve its educational goals.

Since we assume that our students have already been taught the relevant domain knowledge, our system is designed to help the students integrate their piece-by-piece knowledge and correct their misconceptions by working through set of predefined problems, which were selected to deal with physiological phenomena of particular importance or difficulty.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brown, J. S., Burton, R. R., and de Kleer, J. (1982). Pedagogical, natural language, and knowledge engineering techniques in SOPHIE I, II, and III. In D.H. Sleeman and J.S. Brown, (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Academic Press, New York, 227–282.Google Scholar
  2. Clancey, W. (1983). The epistemology of a rule-based expert system: A framework for explanation. Artificial Intelligence, 20, 215–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Grishman, R. and Kittredge, R. (1986). Analyzing Language in Restricted Domains. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Kaplan, R. M. and Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical Functional Grammar: a formal system for grammatical representation. In J. Bresnan, (Ed.). The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 173–281.Google Scholar
  5. Michael, J. A. (1986). Making CBE programs ”smart”: one goal of artificial intelligence research. Computers in Life Science Education, 3, 19–22.Google Scholar
  6. Murray (1988). Control for Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Comparison of Blackboard Architecture and Discourse Management Networks. Santa Clara, CA: FMC, Report R-6267.Google Scholar
  7. Ohlsson, S. (1987). Some principles of intelligent tutoring. In R. W. Lawler and M. Yazdani (Eds.). Artificial Intelligence and Education, Vol. 1. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 203–237.Google Scholar
  8. Pereira, F. and Warren, D.H.D. (1980). Definite clause grammars for language analysis — a survey of the formalism and a comparison with augmented transition networks. Artificial Intelligence, 13, 231–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Reif, F. (1985). Acquiring an effective understanding of physical concepts. In Leo West and A. Leon Pines, (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 133–151.Google Scholar
  10. Reiser, B.J., Anderson, J.R., and Farrell, R.G. (1985). Dynamic standard modeling in an intelligent tutor for Lisp programming. Proceedings of IJCAI, 8–14.Google Scholar
  11. Rovick, A. A. and Brenner, L. (1983). HEARTSIM: A cardiovascular simulation with didactic feedback. Physiologist, 26, 236–239.Google Scholar
  12. Rovick, A. A. and Michael, J. A. (1986). CIRCSIM: An IBM PC computer teaching exercise on blood pressure regulation. Paper presented at the XXX IUPS Congress, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Russell, D. M. (1988). The instructional design environment: The interpreter. In J. Psotka, L.D. Massey, and S.A. Mutter, (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Lessons Learned. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 323–349.Google Scholar
  14. Stevens, A., Collins, A., and Goldin, S. (1982). Misconceptions in student's understanding. In D.H. Sleeman and J.S. Brown, (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems. New York: Academic Press, 13–24.Google Scholar
  15. Tennant, H. R. (1986). The commercial application of natural language interfaces. Proceedings of COLING 86, 167.Google Scholar
  16. Van Lehn, K. (1988). Student modeling. In M.C. Polson, and J.J. Richardson, (Eds.) Foundations of Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 55–78.Google Scholar
  17. Wilkinson, J. (1984). Varieties of teaching. In M.M. Gullette (Ed.), The Art and Craft of Teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1–9.Google Scholar
  18. Woolf, B. P. (1984). Context Dependent Planning in a Machine Tutor. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nakhoon Kim
    • 1
  • Martha Evens
    • 1
  • Joel A. Michael
    • 2
  • Allen A. Rovick
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicago
  2. 2.Department of PhysiologyRush Medical CollegeChicago

Personalised recommendations