Auto tutor: A cognitive system that simulates a tutor through mixed-initiative dialogue

Cognitive Systems: Human Cognitive Models in Systems Design

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 177-212

  Graesser, Arthur C ^a   Olney, Andrew ^a   Haynes, Brian C ^a   Chipman, Patrick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904825716     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410617088     Document Type: Chapter

References (79)

1. Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based Cognitive Tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147-179.
2. Allen, J. F. (1995). Natural language understanding. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.
3. Allen, J. F., Schubert, L. K., Ferguson, G., Heeman, P., Hwang, C. H., Kato, T., Light, M., Martin, N. G., Miller, B. W., Poesio, M., & Traum, D. R. (1995). The TRAINS project: A case study in defining a conversational planning agent. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical AI, 7, 7-48.
4. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
5. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
6. Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 416-427.
7. Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13, 4-16.
8. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Cassell, J., & Thorisson, K. (1999). The power of a nod and a glance: Envelope vs. emotional feedback in animated conversational agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 519-538.
10. Chi, M. T., Bassock, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations:How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
11. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533.
13. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A metaanalysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
14. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Corbett, A. T. (2001). Cognitive computer tutors: Solving the two-sigma problem. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on User Modeling 2001 (pp. 137-147). New York: Springer-Verlag.
16. Craig, S. D., Graesser, A. C., Sullins, J., & Gholson, B. (in press). Affect and learning: An exploratory look into the role of affect in learning. Journal of Educational Media.
17. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperRow.
18. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Foltz, P. W., Gilliam, S., & Kendall, S. (2000). Supporting content-based feedback in on-line writing evaluation with LSA. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 111-128.
20. Fox, B. (1993). The human tutorial dialogue project. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Glenberg, A. M., Wilkinson, A. C., & Epstein, W. (1982). The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 10, 597-602.
22. Graesser, A. C., Gernsbacher, M. A., & Goldman, S. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of discourse processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Graesser, A. C., Hu, X., & McNamara, D. S. (in press). Computerized learning environments that incorporate research in discourse psychology, cognitive science, and computational linguistics. In A. F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications:Festschrift in honor of Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24. Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Mathews, E. C., Mitchell, H. H., Olney, A., Ventura, M., et al. (2003). Why/AutoTutor: A test of learning gains from a physics tutor with natural language dialogue. In R. Alterman & D. Hirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1-6). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., Jackson, G. T., Mitchell, H., Ventura, M., Olney, A., & Louwerse, M. M. (2004). AutoTutor: A tutor with dialogue in natural language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 180-193.
26. Graesser, A. C., Moreno, K., Marineau, J., Adcock, A., Olney, A., Person, N., & Tutoring Research Group. (2003). AutoTutor improves deep learning of computer literacy: Is it the dialogue or the talking head? In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, & J. Kay (Eds.), Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 47-54). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
27. Graesser, A. C., & Olde, B. A. (2003). How does one know whether a person understands a device? The quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 524-536.
28. Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104-137.
29. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., Harter, D., & Tutoring Research Group. (2001). Teaching tactics and dialogue in AutoTutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 257-279.
30. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-on-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 359-387.
31. Graesser, A. C., VanLehn, K., Rose, C., Jordan, P., & Harter, D. (2001). Intelligent tutoring systems with conversational dialogue. AI Magazine, 22, 39-51.
32. Graesser, A. C., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Wiemer-Hastings, P., Kreuz, R., & Tutoring Research Group. (1999). AutoTutor: A simulation of a human tutor. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research, 1, 35-51.
33. Graesser, A. C., Wiemer-Hastings, P., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Harter, D., Person, N. K., & Tutoring Research Group. (2000). Using latent semantic analysis to evaluate the contributions of students in AutoTutor. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 129-148.
34. Gratch, J., Rickel, J., Andre, E., Cassell, J., Petajan, E., & Badler, N. (2002). Creating interactive virtual humans: Some assembly required. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 17, 54-63.
35. Grosz, B. J., & Gordon, P. C. (1999). Conceptions of limited attention and discourse focus. Computational Linguistics, 25(4), 617-624.
36. Grosz, B. J., & Sidner, C. L. (1986). Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12(3), 175-204.
37. Harabagiu, S. M., Maiorano, S. J., & Pasca, M. A. (2002). Open-domain question answering techniques. Natural Language Engineering, 1, 1-38.
38. Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J. W., & Lester, J. C. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 47-78.
39. Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2000). Speech and language processing: An introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
40. Kapoor, A., & Picard, R. (2002). Real-time, fully automated upper facial feature tracking. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Automated Face and Gesture Recognition, Washington, DC.
41. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42. Koenig, S. (1996). Agent-centered search: Situated search with small look-ahead. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (p. 1365). Menlo Park, CA: American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
43. Laird, J. E., Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. (1987). SOAR: An architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 33, 1-64.
44. Landauer, T., & Dumais, S. (1997). An answer to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 2111-2240.
45. Landauer, T., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
46. Larsson, S., & Traum, D. (2000). Information state and dialogue management in the TRINDI dialogue move engine toolkit. Natural Language Engineering, 6(3-4), 323-340.
47. Lenat, D. B. (1995). CYC: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM, 38, 33-38.
48. Lochbaum, K. E. (1998). A collaborative planning model of intentional structure. Computational Linguistics, 24(4), 525-572.
49. Massaro, D. W., & Cohen, M. M. (1995). Perceiving talking faces. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 104-109.
50. McArthur, D., Stasz, C., & Zmuidzinas, M. (1990). Tutoring techniques in algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 197-244.
51. Microsoft.NET Technology Overview. (n.d.). Accessed April 15, 2004, at http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/technologyinfo/overview/default.aspx
52. Moore, J. D. (1995). Participating in explanatory dialogues. Cambridge: MIT Press.
53. Moreno, K. N., Klettke, B., Nibbaragandla, K., Graesser, A. C., & Tutoring Research Group. (2002). Perceived characteristics and pedagogical efficacy of animated conversational agents. In S. A. Cerri, G. Gouarderes, & F. Paraguacu (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 963-971). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
54. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition & Instruction, 19, 177-213.
55. Olde, B. A., Franceschetti, D. R., Karnavat, A., Graesser, A. C., & Tutoring Research Group. (2002). The right stuff: Do you need to sanitize your corpus when using Latent Semantic Analysis? In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 708-713). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56. Olney, A., Louwerse, M. M., Mathews, E. C., Marineau, J., Mitchell, H. H., & Graesser, A. C. (2003). Utterance classification in AutoTutor. In J. Burstein & C. Leacock (Eds.), Building educational applications using natural language processing: Proceedings of the Human Language Technology-North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Conference 2003 Workshop (pp. 1-8). Philadelphia: Association for Computational Linguistics.
57. Otero, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2001). PREG: Elements of a model of question asking. Cognition & Instruction, 19, 143-175.
58. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1, 117-175.
59. Person, N. K., Graesser, A. C., Bautista, L., Mathews, E., & TRG. (2001). Evaluating student learning gains in two versions of AutoTutor. In J. D. Moore, C. L. Redfield, & W. L. Johnson (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: AI-ED in the wired and wireless future (pp. 286-293). Amsterdam: OIS Press.
60. Person, N. K., Graesser, A. C., Kreuz, R. J., Pomeroy, V., & Tutoring Research Group. (2001). Simulating human tutor dialogue moves in AutoTutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 23-39.
61. Person, N. K., Graesser, A. C., & Tutoring Research Group. (2002). Human or computer? Auto Tutor in a bystander Turing test. In S. A. Cerri, G. Gouarderes, & F. Paraguacu (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 821-830). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
62. Person, N. K., Kreuz, R. J., Zwaan, R., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Pragmatics and pedagogy:Conversational rules and politeness strategies may inhibit effective tutoring. Cognition and Instruction, 13(2), 161-188.
63. Picard, R. W. (1997). Affective computing. Cambridge: MIT Press.
64. Putnam, R. T. (1987). Structuring and adjusting content for students: A live and simulated tutoring of addition. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 12-48.
65. Rich, C., & Sidner, C. L. (1998). COLLAGEN: A collaborative manager for software interface agents. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 8, 315-350.
66. Rich, C., Sidner, C. L., & Lesh, N. (2001). COLLAGEN: Applying collaborative discourse theory to human-computer interaction. AI Magazine, 22(4), 15-25.
67. Rickel, J., & Johnson, W. L. (1999). Animated agents for procedural training in virtual reality:Perception, cognition, and motor control. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 343-382.
68. Ritchie, B. (2004). NET languages. Accessed April 15, 2004, at http://www12.brinkster.com/brianr/languages.aspx
69. Sleeman, D., & Brown, J. (Eds.). (1982). Intelligent tutoring systems. New York: Academic Press.
70. Traum, D., & Larsson, S. (2003). The information state approach to dialogue management. In J. van Kuppevelt & R. Smith (Eds.), Current and new directions in discourse and dialogue (pp. 325-353). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
71. The TRINDI Consortium. (2001). The TRINDI book. Gothenburg: Gothenburg University, Department of Linguistics.
72. VanLehn, K., Jones, R. M., & Chi, M. T. H. (1992). A model of the self-explanation effect. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 1-60.
73. VanLehn, K., Lynch, C., Taylor, L., Weinstein, A., Shelby, R., Schulze, K., et al. (2002). Minimally invasive tutoring of complex physics problem solving. In S. A. Cerri, G. Gouarderes, & F. Paraguacu (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2002 (pp. 367-376). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
74. Voorhees, E. (2001). The TREC question answering track. Natural Language Engineering, 7, 361-378.
75. Walker, M. A. (1996). Limited attention and discourse structure. Computational Linguistics, 22(2), 225-264.
76. Weaver, C. A., III. (1990). Calibration and assessment of comprehension. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.
77. Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA-A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM, 9, 36-45.
78. Winston, P. H. (1984). Artificial intelligence. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
79. Xu, W., & Rudnicky, A. (2000, May). Task-based dialog management using an agenda. Presented at the ANLP/NAACL Workshop on Conversational Systems, Somerset, NJ.