Advertisement

Algorithmic Debugging to Support Cognitive Diagnosis in Tutoring Systems

  • Claus Zinn
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7006)

Abstract

Cognitive modelling in intelligent tutoring systems aims at identifying a learner’s skills and knowledge from his answers to tutor questions and other observed behaviour. In this paper, we propose an innovative variant of Shapiro’s algorithmic debugging technique whose application can be used to pin-point learners’ erroneous behaviour in terms of an irreducible disagreement to the execution trace of an expert model. Our variant has two major benefits: in contrast to traditional approaches, it does not rely on an explicit encoding on mal-rules, and second, it induces a natural teacher-learner dialogue with no need for the prior scripting of individial turns or higher-level dialogue planning.

Keywords

Logic Programming Execution Trace Expert Model Prolog Program Irreducible Disagreement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Beller, S., Hoppe, U.: Deductive error reconstruction and classification in a logic programming framework. In: Brna, P., Ohlsson, S., Pain, H. (eds.) Proc. of the World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp. 433–440 (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brown, J.S., Burton, R.R.: Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science 2, 155–192 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burton, R.R.: Debuggy: Diagnosis of errors in basic mathematical skills. In: Sherman, D., Brown, J.S. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Academic Press, London (1982)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Corbett, A.T., Anderson, J.R., Patterson, E.J.: Problem compilation and tutoring flexibility in the lisp tutor. In: International Conference of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Montreal (1988)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kawai, K., Mizoguchi, R., Kakusho, O., Toyoda, J.: A framework for ICAI systems based on inductive inference and logic programming. New Generation Computing 5, 115–129 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R., Hadley, W.H., Mark, M.A.: Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 8(1), 30–43 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reiser, B.J., Anderson, J.R., Farrell, R.G.: Dynamic student modelling in an intelligent tutor for lisp programming. In: IJCAI 1985: Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 8–14. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1985)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Self, J.: Student models and artificial intelligence. Computers & Education 3, 309–312 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shapiro, E.Y.: Algorithmic Program Debugging. ACM Distinguished Dissertations. MIT Press (1983); Thesis (Ph.D.) – Yale University (1982)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claus Zinn
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of KonstanzKonstanzGermany

Personalised recommendations