Younger generations are growing up in a world increasingly shaped by intelligent technologies, making early AI literacy crucial for developing the skills to critically understand and navigate them. However, education in this field often emphasizes tool-based learning, prioritizing usage over understanding the underlying concepts. This lack of knowledge leaves non-experts, especially children, prone to misconceptions, unrealistic expectations, and difficulties in recognizing biases and stereotypes. In this paper, we propose a structured and replicable teaching approach that fosters foundational AI literacy in primary students, by building upon core mathematical elements closely connected to and of interest in primary curricula, to strengthen conceptualization, data representation, classification reasoning, and evaluation of AI. To assess the effectiveness of our approach, we conducted an empirical study with thirty-one fifth-grade students across two classes, evaluating their progress through a post-test and a satisfaction survey. Our results indicate improvements in terminology understanding and usage, features description, logical reasoning, and evaluative skills, with students showing a deeper comprehension of decision-making processes and their limitations. Moreover, the approach proved engaging, with students particularly enjoying activities that linked AI concepts to real-world reasoning. Materials: https://github.com/tail-unica/ai-literacy-primary-ed.
Generating high-quality MCQs, especially those targeting diverse cognitive levels and incorporating common misconceptions into distractor design, is time-consuming and expertise-intensive, making manual creation impractical at scale. Current automated approaches typically generate questions at lower cognitive levels and fail to incorporate domain-specific misconceptions. This paper presents a hierarchical concept map-based framework that provides structured knowledge to guide LLMs in generating MCQs with distractors. We chose high-school physics as our test domain and began by developing a hierarchical concept map covering major Physics topics and their interconnections with an efficient database design. Next, through an automated pipeline, topic-relevant sections of these concept maps are retrieved to serve as a structured context for the LLM to generate questions and distractors that specifically target common misconceptions. Lastly, an automated validation is completed to ensure that the generated MCQs meet the requirements provided. We evaluate our framework against two baseline approaches: a base LLM and a RAG-based generation. We conducted expert evaluations and student assessments of the generated MCQs. Expert evaluation shows that our method significantly outperforms the baseline approaches, achieving a success rate of 75.20% in meeting all quality criteria compared to approximately 37% for both baseline methods. Student assessment data reveal that our concept map-driven approach achieved a significantly lower guess success rate of 28.05% compared to 37.10% for the baselines, indicating a more effective assessment of conceptual understanding. The results demonstrate that our concept map-based approach enables robust assessment across cognitive levels and instant identification of conceptual gaps, facilitating faster feedback loops and targeted interventions at scale.
Personalized recommendation is widely used in the web applications, and graph contrastive learning (GCL) has gradually become a dominant approach in recommender systems, primarily due to its ability to extract self-supervised signals from raw interaction data, effectively alleviating the problem of data sparsity. A classic GCL-based method typically uses data augmentation during graph convolution to generates more contrastive views, and performs contrast on these new views to obtain rich self-supervised signals. Despite this paradigm is effective, the reasons behind the performance gains remain a mystery. In this paper, we first reveal via theoretical derivation that the gradient descent process of the CL objective is formally equivalent to graph convolution, which implies that CL objective inherently supports neighborhood aggregation on interaction graphs. We further substantiate this capability through experimental validation and identify common misconceptions in the selection of positive samples in previous methods, which limit the potential of CL objective. Based on this discovery, we propose the Light Contrastive Collaborative Filtering (LightCCF) method, which introduces a novel neighborhood aggregation objective to bring users closer to all interacted items while pushing them away from other positive pairs, thus achieving high-quality neighborhood aggregation with very low time complexity. On three highly sparse public datasets, the proposed method effectively aggregate neighborhood information while preventing graph over-smoothing, demonstrating significant improvements over existing GCL-based counterparts in both training efficiency and recommendation accuracy. Our implementations are publicly accessible.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely deployed in diverse scenarios, the extent to which they could tacitly spread misinformation emerges as a critical safety concern. Current research primarily evaluates LLMs on explicit false statements, overlooking how misinformation often manifests subtly as unchallenged premises in real-world interactions. We curated EchoMist, the first comprehensive benchmark for implicit misinformation, where false assumptions are embedded in the query to LLMs. EchoMist targets circulated, harmful, and ever-evolving implicit misinformation from diverse sources, including realistic human-AI conversations and social media interactions. Through extensive empirical studies on 15 state-of-the-art LLMs, we find that current models perform alarmingly poorly on this task, often failing to detect false premises and generating counterfactual explanations. We also investigate two mitigation methods, i.e., Self-Alert and RAG, to enhance LLMs' capability to counter implicit misinformation. Our findings indicate that EchoMist remains a persistent challenge and underscore the critical need to safeguard against the risk of implicit misinformation.
Understanding the structure of neural network loss surfaces, particularly the emergence of low-loss tunnels, is critical for advancing neural network theory and practice. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to directly embed loss tunnels into the loss landscape of neural networks. Exploring the properties of these loss tunnels offers new insights into their length and structure and sheds light on some common misconceptions. We then apply our approach to Bayesian neural networks, where we improve subspace inference by identifying pitfalls and proposing a more natural prior that better guides the sampling procedure.
Large multimodal models (LMMs) have shown remarkable performance in the visual commonsense reasoning (VCR) task, which aims to answer a multiple-choice question based on visual commonsense within an image. However, the ability of LMMs to correct potential visual commonsense errors in the distractor upon their occurrence is yet under-explored. Drawing inspiration from how a human teacher crafts challenging distractors to test students' comprehension of the concepts or skills and assists them in identifying and correcting errors toward the answer, we are the pioneering research for LMMs to simulate this error correction process. To this end, we employ GPT-4 as a ``teacher'' to collect the explainable feedback dataset VCR-DF for error correction, which serves as a benchmark to evaluate the ability of LMMs to identify misconceptions and clarify reasons behind the error in VCR distractors toward final answers. In addition, we propose an LMM-based Pedagogical Expert Instructed Feedback Generation (PEIFG) model to incorporate the learnable expert prompts and multimodal instruction as guidance for feedback generation. Experimental results show that our PEIFG significantly outperforms existing LMMs. We believe that our benchmark provides a new direction for evaluating the capabilities of LMMs.
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have led to the development of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered tutoring chatbots, showing promise in providing broad access to high-quality personalized education. Existing works have studied how to make LLMs follow tutoring principles, but have not studied broader uses of LLMs for supporting tutoring. Up until now, tracing student knowledge and analyzing misconceptions has been difficult and time-consuming to implement for open-ended dialogue tutoring. In this work, we investigate whether LLMs can be supportive of this task: we first use LLM prompting methods to identify the knowledge components/skills involved in each dialogue turn, i.e., a tutor utterance posing a task or a student utterance that responds to it. We also evaluate whether the student responds correctly to the tutor and verify the LLM's accuracy using human expert annotations. We then apply a range of knowledge tracing (KT) methods on the resulting labeled data to track student knowledge levels over an entire dialogue. We conduct experiments on two tutoring dialogue datasets, and show that a novel yet simple LLM-based method, LLMKT, significantly outperforms existing KT methods in predicting student response correctness in dialogues. We perform extensive qualitative analyses to highlight the challenges in dialogueKT and outline multiple avenues for future work.
In the rapidly advancing realm of educational technology, it becomes critical to accurately trace and understand student knowledge states. Conventional Knowledge Tracing (KT) models have mainly focused on binary responses (i.e., correct and incorrect answers) to questions. Unfortunately, they largely overlook the essential information in students' actual answer choices, particularly for Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), which could help reveal each learner's misconceptions or knowledge gaps. To tackle these challenges, we propose the Concept map-driven Response disentanglement method for enhancing Knowledge Tracing (CRKT) model. CRKT benefits KT by directly leveraging answer choices--beyond merely identifying correct or incorrect answers--to distinguish responses with different incorrect choices. We further introduce the novel use of unchosen responses by employing disentangled representations to get insights from options not selected by students. Additionally, CRKT tracks the student's knowledge state at the concept level and encodes the concept map, representing the relationships between them, to better predict unseen concepts. This approach is expected to provide actionable feedback, improving the learning experience. Our comprehensive experiments across multiple datasets demonstrate CRKT's effectiveness, achieving superior performance in prediction accuracy and interpretability over state-of-the-art models.
The article concerns low-rank approximation of matrices generated by sampling a smooth function of two $m$-dimensional variables. We identify several misconceptions surrounding a claim that, for a specific class of analytic functions, such $n \times n$ matrices admit accurate entrywise approximation of rank that is independent of $m$ and grows as $\log(n)$ -- colloquially known as ''big-data matrices are approximately low-rank''. We provide a theoretical explanation of the numerical results presented in support of this claim, describing three narrower classes of functions for which function-generated matrices can be approximated within an entrywise error of order $\varepsilon$ with rank $\mathcal{O}(\log(n) \varepsilon^{-2} \log(\varepsilon^{-1}))$ that is independent of the dimension $m$: (i) functions of the inner product of the two variables, (ii) functions of the Euclidean distance between the variables, and (iii) shift-invariant positive-definite kernels. We extend our argument to tensor-train approximation of tensors generated with functions of the ''higher-order inner product'' of their multiple variables. We discuss our results in the context of low-rank approximation of (a) growing datasets and (b) attention in transformer neural networks.
This paper introduces MalAlgoQA, a novel dataset designed to evaluate the counterfactual reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) through a pedagogical approach. The dataset comprises mathematics and reading comprehension questions, each accompanied by four answer choices and their corresponding rationales. At the heart of MalAlgoQA are ``malgorithms'' - rationales behind incorrect answer choices that represent flawed yet logically coherent reasoning paths. These malgorithms serve as counterfactual scenarios, allowing us to assess an LLM's ability to identify and analyze flawed reasoning patterns. We propose the Malgorithm Identification task, where LLMs are assessed based on their ability to identify corresponding malgorithm given an incorrect answer choice. To evaluate the model performance, we introduce two metrics: Algorithm Identification Accuracy (AIA) for correct answer rationale identification, and Malgorithm Identification Accuracy (MIA) for incorrect answer rationale identification. Our experiments reveal that state-of-the-art LLMs exhibit significant performance drops in MIA compared to AIA, highlighting the challenges in counterfactual reasoning. Surprisingly, we find that the chain-of-thought prompting technique not only fails to consistently enhance MIA but can sometimes lead to underperformance compared to simple prompting. These findings have important implications for developing LLMs with improved counterfactual reasoning, particularly relevant for AI-powered tutoring systems, where identifying and addressing student misconceptions is essential. MalAlgoQA dataset is available \href{https://github.com/luffycodes/MalAlgoQA-Dataset}{here}.
High-quality distractors are crucial to both the assessment and pedagogical value of multiple-choice questions (MCQs), where manually crafting ones that anticipate knowledge deficiencies or misconceptions among real students is difficult. Meanwhile, automated distractor generation, even with the help of large language models (LLMs), remains challenging for subjects like math. It is crucial to not only identify plausible distractors but also understand the error behind them. In this paper, we introduce DiVERT (Distractor Generation with Variational Errors Represented as Text), a novel variational approach that learns an interpretable representation of errors behind distractors in math MCQs. Through experiments on a real-world math MCQ dataset with 1,434 questions used by hundreds of thousands of students, we show that DiVERT, despite using a base open-source LLM with 7B parameters, outperforms state-of-the-art approaches using GPT-4o on downstream distractor generation. We also conduct a human evaluation with math educators and find that DiVERT leads to error labels that are of comparable quality to human-authored ones.
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) enhance personalized learning by predicting student answers to provide immediate and customized instruction. However, recent research has primarily focused on the correctness of the answer rather than the student's performance on specific answer choices, limiting insights into students' thought processes and potential misconceptions. To address this gap, we present MCQStudentBert, an answer forecasting model that leverages the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to integrate contextual understanding of students' answering history along with the text of the questions and answers. By predicting the specific answer choices students are likely to make, practitioners can easily extend the model to new answer choices or remove answer choices for the same multiple-choice question (MCQ) without retraining the model. In particular, we compare MLP, LSTM, BERT, and Mistral 7B architectures to generate embeddings from students' past interactions, which are then incorporated into a finetuned BERT's answer-forecasting mechanism. We apply our pipeline to a dataset of language learning MCQ, gathered from an ITS with over 10,000 students to explore the predictive accuracy of MCQStudentBert, which incorporates student interaction patterns, in comparison to correct answer prediction and traditional mastery-learning feature-based approaches. This work opens the door to more personalized content, modularization, and granular support.
Classification systems are evaluated in a countless number of papers. However, we find that evaluation practice is often nebulous. Frequently, metrics are selected without arguments, and blurry terminology invites misconceptions. For instance, many works use so-called 'macro' metrics to rank systems (e.g., 'macro F1') but do not clearly specify what they would expect from such a `macro' metric. This is problematic, since picking a metric can affect research findings, and thus any clarity in the process should be maximized. Starting from the intuitive concepts of bias and prevalence, we perform an analysis of common evaluation metrics. The analysis helps us understand the metrics' underlying properties, and how they align with expectations as found expressed in papers. Then we reflect on the practical situation in the field, and survey evaluation practice in recent shared tasks. We find that metric selection is often not supported with convincing arguments, an issue that can make a system ranking seem arbitrary. Our work aims at providing overview and guidance for more informed and transparent metric selection, fostering meaningful evaluation.
Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are ubiquitous in almost all levels of education since they are easy to administer, grade, and are a reliable format in assessments and practices. One of the most important aspects of MCQs is the distractors, i.e., incorrect options that are designed to target common errors or misconceptions among real students. To date, the task of crafting high-quality distractors largely remains a labor and time-intensive process for teachers and learning content designers, which has limited scalability. In this work, we study the task of automated distractor generation in the domain of math MCQs and explore a wide variety of large language model (LLM)-based approaches, from in-context learning to fine-tuning. We conduct extensive experiments using a real-world math MCQ dataset and find that although LLMs can generate some mathematically valid distractors, they are less adept at anticipating common errors or misconceptions among real students.
Can a mere next-token predictor faithfully model human intelligence? We crystallize this emerging concern and correct popular misconceptions surrounding it, and advocate a simple multi-token objective. As a starting point, we argue that the two often-conflated phases of next-token prediction -- autoregressive inference and teacher-forced training -- must be treated distinctly. The popular criticism that errors can compound during autoregressive inference, crucially assumes that teacher-forcing has learned an accurate next-token predictor. This assumption sidesteps a more deep-rooted problem we expose: in certain classes of tasks, teacher-forcing can simply fail to learn an accurate next-token predictor in the first place. We describe a general mechanism of how teacher-forcing can fail, and design a minimal planning task where both the Transformer and the Mamba architecture empirically fail in that manner -- remarkably, despite the task being straightforward to learn. Finally, we provide preliminary evidence that this failure can be resolved using a simple modification that predicts multiple tokens in advance. We hope this finding can ground future debates and inspire explorations beyond the next-token prediction paradigm. We make our code available under https://github.com/gregorbachmann/Next-Token-Failures
The rise of Multi-modal Pre-training highlights the necessity for a unified Multi-Modal Knowledge Graph (MMKG) representation learning framework. Such a framework is essential for embedding structured knowledge into multi-modal Large Language Models effectively, alleviating issues like knowledge misconceptions and multi-modal hallucinations. In this work, we explore the efficacy of models in accurately embedding entities within MMKGs through two pivotal tasks: Multi-modal Knowledge Graph Completion (MKGC) and Multi-modal Entity Alignment (MMEA). Building on this foundation, we propose a novel SNAG method that utilizes a Transformer-based architecture equipped with modality-level noise masking to robustly integrate multi-modal entity features in KGs. By incorporating specific training objectives for both MKGC and MMEA, our approach achieves SOTA performance across a total of ten datasets, demonstrating its versatility. Moreover, SNAG can not only function as a standalone model but also enhance other existing methods, providing stable performance improvements. Code and data are available at https://github.com/zjukg/SNAG.
Often, a good explanation for a program's unexpected behavior is a bug in the programmer's code. But sometimes, an even better explanation is a bug in the programmer's mental model of the language or API they are using. Instead of merely debugging our current code ("giving the programmer a fish"), what if our tools could directly debug our mental models ("teaching the programmer to fish")? In this paper, we apply recent ideas from computational cognitive science to offer a principled framework for doing exactly that. Given a "why?" question about a program, we automatically infer potential misconceptions about the language/API that might cause the user to be surprised by the program's behavior -- and then analyze those misconceptions to provide explanations of the program's behavior. Our key idea is to formally represent misconceptions as counterfactual (erroneous) semantics for the language/API, which can be inferred and debugged using program synthesis techniques. We demonstrate our framework, WatChat, by building systems for explanation in two domains: JavaScript type coercion, and the Git version control system. We evaluate WatChatJS and WatChatGit by comparing their outputs to experimentally-collected human-written explanations in these two domains: we show that WatChat's explanations exhibit key features of human-written explanation, unlike those of a state-of-the-art language model.
Automatically generating feedback via large language models (LLMs) in intelligent tutoring systems and online learning platforms has the potential to improve the learning outcomes of many students. However, both feedback generation and evaluation are challenging: feedback content has to be valid especially in subjects like math, which requires models to understand the problem, the solution, and where the student's error lies. Feedback also has to be pedagogically valid to reflect effective tutoring strategies, such as explaining possible misconceptions and encouraging the student, among other desirable features. In this work, we address both problems of automatically generating and evaluating feedback while considering both correctness and alignment. First, we propose a rubric for evaluating math feedback and show that GPT-4 is able to effectively use it to annotate human-written and LLM-generated feedback. Second, we propose a framework for feedback generation that optimizes both correctness and alignment using reinforcement learning (RL). Specifically, we use GPT-4's annotations to create preferences over feedback pairs in an augmented dataset for training via direct preference optimization (DPO). We show that our methods significantly increase the correctness and alignment of generated feedback with Llama 2, an open-source LLM, qualitatively analyze our generation and evaluation systems using case studies, and outline several areas for future work.
The standard way to teach models is by feeding them lots of data. However, this approach often teaches models incorrect ideas because they pick up on misleading signals in the data. To prevent such misconceptions, we must necessarily provide additional information beyond the training data. Prior methods incorporate additional instance-level supervision, such as labels for misleading features or additional labels for debiased data. However, such strategies require a large amount of labeler effort. We hypothesize that people are good at providing textual feedback at the concept level, a capability that existing teaching frameworks do not leverage. We propose Clarify, a novel interface and method for interactively correcting model misconceptions. Through Clarify, users need only provide a short text description of a model's consistent failure patterns. Then, in an entirely automated way, we use such descriptions to improve the training process. Clarify is the first end-to-end system for user model correction. Our user studies show that non-expert users can successfully describe model misconceptions via Clarify, leading to increased worst-case performance in two datasets. We additionally conduct a case study on a large-scale image dataset, ImageNet, using Clarify to find and rectify 31 novel hard subpopulations.
Student modeling is central to many educational technologies as it enables predicting future learning outcomes and designing targeted instructional strategies. However, open-ended learning domains pose challenges for accurately modeling students due to the diverse behaviors and a large space of possible misconceptions. To approach these challenges, we explore the application of large language models (LLMs) for in-context student modeling in open-ended learning domains. More concretely, given a particular student's attempt on a reference task as observation, the objective is to synthesize the student's attempt on a target task. We introduce a novel framework, LLM for Student Synthesis (LLM-SS), that leverages LLMs for synthesizing a student's behavior. Our framework can be combined with different LLMs; moreover, we fine-tune LLMs to boost their student modeling capabilities. We instantiate several methods based on LLM-SS framework and evaluate them using an existing benchmark, StudentSyn, for student attempt synthesis in a visual programming domain. Experimental results show that our methods perform significantly better than the baseline method NeurSS provided in the StudentSyn benchmark. Furthermore, our method using a fine-tuned version of the GPT-3.5 model is significantly better than using the base GPT-3.5 model and gets close to human tutors' performance.