The Principle of State Expansion in Task State-Space Navigation

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 158, Issue , 2007, Pages 9-16

  Pearce, Darren ^a   Luckin, Rosemary ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

artificial intelligence; HCI; interaction design; novel interfaces; state space navigation; task interface design

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INTERFACE STATES; NAVIGATION;

CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS; INTERACTION DESIGN; INTERFACE DESIGNS; NOVEL INTERFACE; SPACE NAVIGATION; STATE-SPACE; STATE-SPACE NAVIGATION;; TASK INTERFACE; TASK INTERFACE DESIGN; TASK STATE;

EXPANSION;

EID: 84961559227     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. P. Goldstein, “The genetic graph: a representation for the evolution of procedural knowledge,” in Intelligent Tutoring Systems (D. Sleeman and J. S. Brown, eds.), New York: Academic Press, 1982.
2. B. Brecht, “Student models: the genetic graph approach,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 28, pp. 483–504, 1988.
3. R. Luckin and B. du Boulay, “Designing a zone of proximal adjustment,” International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 198–220, 1999.
4. S. Bull and A. Mabbott, “20000 inspections of a domain-independent open learner model with individual and comparison views,” in Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 8th International Conference (M. Ikeda, K. Ashley, and T.-W. Chan, eds.), (Heidelberg, Berlin), pp. 422–432, Springer-Verlag, 2006.
5. S. Bull, P. Brna, and H. Pain, “Extending the scope of the student model,” User Modelling and User Adapted Interaction, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 45–65, 1995.
6. J. Kay, “Learner control, user modeling and user-adapted interaction,” Tenth Anniversary Special Issue, vol. 11, no. 1-2, pp. 111–127, 2001.
7. S. J. Derry, “Metacognitive models of learning and instructional systems design,” in Foundations and Frontiers in Instructional Computing Systems (P. H. Winne and M. Jones, eds.), (Berlin), Springer-Verlag, 1991.
8. R. Luckin and L. Hammerton, “Getting to know me: helping learners understand their own learning needs through metacognitive scaffolding,” in Intelligent Tutoring Systems (S. A. Cerri, G. Gouarderes, and F. Paranguaca, eds.), pp. 759–771, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2002.
9. E. Toth, D. Suthers, and A. Lesgold, “Mapping to know: The effects of evidence maps and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry skills,” Science Education, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 264–286, 2002.
10. T. Murray, L. Winship, R. Bellin, and M. Cornell, “Toward glass box educational simulations: Reifying models for inspection and design,” in AI-ED 2001 Workshop on External Representations in AIED: Multiple Forms and Multiple Roles, (San Antonio, Texas), May 2001.
11. L. Kerawalla, D. Pearce, N. Yuill, R. Luckin, and A. Harris, “I’m keeping those there, are you? The role of a new user interface paradigm — Separate Control Of Shared Space (SCOSS) — in the collaborative decision-making process.” Computers and Education, forthcoming.
12. D. Pearce, L. Kerawalla, R. Luckin, N. Yuill, and A. Harris, “The Task Sharing Framework: A generic approach to scaffolding collaboration and meta-collaboration in educational software,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computers in Education, (Singapore), 2005.