Abstract
We analyse how a learner modelling engine that uses belief functions for evidence and belief representation, called xLM, reacts to different input information about the learner in terms of changes in the state of its beliefs and the decisions that it derives from them. The paper covers xLM induction of evidence with different strengths from the qualitative and quantitative properties of the input, the amount of indirect evidence derived from direct evidence, and differences in beliefs and decisions that result from interpreting different sequences of events simulating learners evolving in different directions. The results here presented substantiate our vision of xLM is a proof of existence for a generic and potentially comprehensive learner modelling subsystem that explicitly represents uncertainty, conflict and ignorance in beliefs. These are key properties of learner modelling engines in the bizarre world of open Web-based learning environments that rely on the content+metadata paradigm.
This publication was generated in the context of the LeActiveMath project, funded under the 6th Framework Programm of the European Community – (Contract N° IST- 2003-507826). The authors are solely responsible for its content, it does not represent the opinion of the European Community and the Community is not responsible for any use that might be made of data appearing therein.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Self, J.A.: Bypassing the intractable problem of student modelling. In: Proceedings of ITS 1988, Montréal, Canada, pp. 18–24 (1988)
Lee, M.H.: On models, modelling and the distinctive nature of model-based reasoning. AI Communications 12, 127–137 (1999)
Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R.: Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 8, 30–43 (1997)
Conati, C.: Toward comprehensive student models: Modeling meta-cognitive skills and affective states in ITS. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, p. 902. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Burton, R.B.: Diagonising bugs in a simple procedural skill, ch. 8. In: [13], pp. 157–183
Corbett, A.T., Anderson, J.R.: Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 4, 253–278 (1995)
LeActiveMath Consortium: Language-enhanced, user adaptive, interactive elearning for mathematics (2004)
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development: The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework (2003)
Burton, R.B., Brown, J.S.: An investigation of computer coaching for informal learning activities, ch. 4. In: [13], pp. 79–98
Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)
Smets, P., Kennes, R.: The transferable belief model. Artificial Intelligence 66, 191–234 (1994)
Morales, R., van Labeke, N., Brna, P.: Approximate modelling of the multi-dimensional learner. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, T.-W. (eds.) ITS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4053, pp. 555–564. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Sleeman, D.H., Brown, J.S. (eds.): Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Academic Press, New York (1982)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Morales, R., Van Labeke, N., Brna, P. (2006). A Contingency Analysis of LeActiveMath’s Learner Model. In: Gelbukh, A., Reyes-Garcia, C.A. (eds) MICAI 2006: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. MICAI 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4293. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11925231_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11925231_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-49026-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49058-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)