Generating Feedback-Ladders for Logical Errors in Programming using Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.00302v3
• Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 20:38:58 GMT
• Title: Generating Feedback-Ladders for Logical Errors in Programming using Large Language Models
• Authors: Hasnain Heickal, Andrew Lan,
• Abstract summary: Large language model (LLM)-based methods have shown great promise in feedback generation for programming assignments. This paper explores using LLMs to generate a "feedback-ladder", i.e., multiple levels of feedback for the same problem-submission pair. We evaluate the quality of the generated feedback-ladder via a user study with students, educators, and researchers.
• Score: 2.1485350418225244
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In feedback generation for logical errors in programming assignments, large language model (LLM)-based methods have shown great promise. These methods ask the LLM to generate feedback given the problem statement and a student's (buggy) submission. There are several issues with these types of methods. First, the generated feedback messages are often too direct in revealing the error in the submission and thus diminish valuable opportunities for the student to learn. Second, they do not consider the student's learning context, i.e., their previous submissions, current knowledge, etc. Third, they are not layered since existing methods use a single, shared prompt for all student submissions. In this paper, we explore using LLMs to generate a "feedback-ladder", i.e., multiple levels of feedback for the same problem-submission pair. We evaluate the quality of the generated feedback-ladder via a user study with students, educators, and researchers. We have observed diminishing effectiveness for higher-level feedback and higher-scoring submissions overall in the study. In practice, our method enables teachers to select an appropriate level of feedback to show to a student based on their personal learning context, or in a progressive manner to go more detailed if a higher-level feedback fails to correct the student's error.

Related papers

• CANDERE-COACH: Reinforcement Learning from Noisy Feedback [12.232688822099325]
  The CANDERE-COACH algorithm is capable of learning from noisy feedback by a nonoptimal teacher. We propose a noise-filtering mechanism to de-noise online feedback data, thereby enabling the RL agent to successfully learn with up to 40% of the teacher feedback being incorrect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-23T20:14:12Z)
• "My Grade is Wrong!": A Contestable AI Framework for Interactive Feedback in Evaluating Student Essays [6.810086342993699]
  This paper introduces CAELF, a Contestable AI Empowered LLM Framework for automating interactive feedback. CAELF allows students to query, challenge, and clarify their feedback by integrating a multi-agent system with computational argumentation. A case study on 500 critical thinking essays with user studies demonstrates that CAELF significantly improves interactive feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T17:59:01Z)
• Stepwise Verification and Remediation of Student Reasoning Errors with Large Language Model Tutors [78.53699244846285]
  Large language models (LLMs) present an opportunity to scale high-quality personalized education to all. LLMs struggle to precisely detect student's errors and tailor their feedback to these errors. Inspired by real-world teaching practice where teachers identify student errors and customize their response based on them, we focus on verifying student solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T10:11:40Z)
• Show, Don't Tell: Aligning Language Models with Demonstrated Feedback [54.10302745921713]
  Demonstration ITerated Task Optimization (DITTO) directly aligns language model outputs to a user's demonstrated behaviors. We evaluate DITTO's ability to learn fine-grained style and task alignment across domains such as news articles, emails, and blog posts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-02T23:13:56Z)
• Can Large Language Models Replicate ITS Feedback on Open-Ended Math Questions? [3.7399138244928145]
  We study the capabilities of large language models to generate feedback for open-ended math questions. We find that open-source and proprietary models both show promise in replicating the feedback they see during training, but do not generalize well to previously unseen student errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T11:53:53Z)
• Improving the Validity of Automatically Generated Feedback via Reinforcement Learning [50.067342343957876]
  We propose a framework for feedback generation that optimize 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)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T20:25:50Z)
• System-Level Natural Language Feedback [83.24259100437965]
  We show how to use feedback to formalize system-level design decisions in a human-in-the-loop-process. We conduct two case studies of this approach for improving search query and dialog response generation. We show the combination of system-level and instance-level feedback brings further gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T16:21:40Z)
• Fine-Grained Human Feedback Gives Better Rewards for Language Model Training [108.25635150124539]
  Language models (LMs) often exhibit undesirable text generation behaviors, including generating false, toxic, or irrelevant outputs. We introduce Fine-Grained RLHF, a framework that enables training and learning from reward functions that are fine-grained in two respects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T17:11:37Z)
• ProtoTransformer: A Meta-Learning Approach to Providing Student Feedback [54.142719510638614]
  In this paper, we frame the problem of providing feedback as few-shot classification. A meta-learner adapts to give feedback to student code on a new programming question from just a few examples by instructors. Our approach was successfully deployed to deliver feedback to 16,000 student exam-solutions in a programming course offered by a tier 1 university.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-23T22:41:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.