USAGE OF FRAME SYSTEM FOR MODELLING OF INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE

Ieva Valkovska ,Vita Graudina, Janis Grundspenkis Riga Technical University Kalku Str., Riga LV-1658, Latvia E-mail: {vita, jgrun, ieva}@cs.rtu.lv

KEYWORDS Intelligent tutoring systems, frame systems.

ABSTRACT This paper presents the design of multi-agent system (MAS) for simulation of tutoring/learning process. An approach is based on a frame system that uses structural modelling principles for representing agents in MAS. It is necessary to make experiments with tutoring techniques, methods, and strategies, tutoring material representation and delivering order of it to find better ways how to perform cognition promoting learning. Analysis of these experiments will allow assessing decisions made, and success of learning process depending on selected tutoring strategies. It will increase students role in learning. The more forms of information, data, knowledge exists, the larger chance that Student agent can find a form that will help to learn in the best possible manner is. During the last decade informatization of schools and libraries has widely increased computer availability in regions of Latvia that facilitates formation of information society. Intelligent tutoring systems can have large prospective in pupils and students tutoring as well as in life-long learning.

achieving the same objectives as modules. The tutoring agent can create and expand the curriculum, communicate with students as well as store several tutoring strategies. The Student agent can perform learning using delivered materials by the Tutoring agent. It also stores knowledge about learners personality and habits of learning (Grundspenkis and Anohina, 2005).

PROPOSED ARHITECTURE For modelling tutoring/learning process we propose MAS (Weiss, 1999; Wooldridge, 2002); usually MAS and separate agents are used in providing tutoring process, as pedagogical agents (Johnson, 2003; Dorca et al., 2003; Grundspenkis and Anohina, 2005) other agents that support student activities, like filtering agents, search agents, recommender agents and other personal agents (Grundspenkis, 2003). In our proposal humans and/or their communities are replaced with agents to perform experiments with large and complex systems within they are involved, like education in our case. Our conceptual MAS consists of four agents (see Figure 1), namely, a Tutor agent that simulates the real tutor and has knowledge about tutoring process and particular courses; a Student agent that corresponds to real student and it has knowledge about learning process and possibilities to get additional information, not only delivered one by the Tutor agent; a search agent that supports search of additional information using internet, intranet and available databases, a Communication agent that provides communication and collaboration protocols.
Communication agent

ARCHITECTURE OF INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS Computer-based learning, especially intelligent tutoring systems provides tools to create personalized tutoring according to user feedbacks in order to find best ways of tutoring. Use of multi-agent systems in tutoring makes it possible to support the development of more interactive and adaptive systems. Agent can easily perform complex operations based on their goals (Shen et al., 2005). A multi-agent intelligent tutoring system (Garro and Palopoli, 2002) extends a traditional course management system with a set of intelligent functions allowing student modelling and automatic curriculum generation (Capuano et al., 2000). Set of agents can be used instead of traditional modules in intelligent tutoring systems. Each of agents provides

Tutor agent

Student agent

Search agent

Figure 1. Hierarchy of agents.

Agents in a MAS necessarily interact with other agents to achieve their goals, such as performing students tutoring. There are interactions needed for finding solutions of the problems, like choosing the proper tutoring strategy. Figure 2 shows main information and data flows between agents that provide interactions in a MAS. The Tutor agent delivers course materials, quizzes and results to the Student agent and receives from it answers to quizzes. The Student agent can make questions if course materials are hard to understand. Questions are given to the Search agent to find information on the Web, in databases and other resources. In our case the Tutor agent includes functions from test agents and content manager which are used in other architectures (Graudina and Grundspenkis, 2005).
Tutor agent
er s
Course content

activities and reactions. One contact frame includes 3..N properties. The number 3 is gained from the predefined properties (Function, Number of Contact frames, Number of Procedure frames). Each property list can have 0..N behaviour frames. Property list is the list of all defined contact frame properties.
Agent Class frame 1 0..N Procedure frame

0..N Contact frame 1 3..N 1 Properties: 0..N Behaviuor frame

et

Test results

am

Answers

Se

ar ch

Quiz

Figure 3. Agents knowledge representing frame system. Idea about using several frames (contact frames, behaviour frames, etc.) to describe communications, behaviour and so on, is borrowed from complex technical systems describing approach, called structural modelling (Grundspenkis, 1997). The framework of structural modelling consists of three models, namely, a model of morphological structure and two kinds of models of functional structures. A frame hierarchy is used to represent all primitives of the model of morphological structure into knowledge base. Structural modelling helps to create a static view of a system. To represent dynamics the procedural knowledge is encapsulated into the knowledge base, providing behavioural, diagnosis and predictive reasoning (Grundspenkis, 2004). Representation of agents knowledge base In this section we represent knowledge that is recommended to be stored in agents of proposed MAS. We show knowledge base of the Tutor agent. Other agents are described in same manner. Since the Communication agent is used for providing systems functions, activization of actions and organisation of interaction, we can say that ITS actually consists of three agents which are subclasses of Communication agent that is an abstract class. Subclasses inherit knowledge about interaction and communication protocols from the Communication agent. Remaining part of this section contains the description of the Tutor agent, its behaviour, actions, and functions using frame system. In Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7 words in italic are values that are user-defined or automatically updated. Asterisk (*) points predefined slots. All empty fields can be specified later by user depending on particular course. User-defined properties follow after - - - - line.

Information

Search agent
Questions, search parameters

pa r

Student agent

Figure 2. Interactions between agents. The Tutor, Student and Search agents are subclasses of Communication agent and they inherit its knowledge. A frame system is used to describe agents as concepts with corresponding instances. Frame system Usually a frame system represents a hierarchy of frames. Two or three level hierarchies of frames are commonly used, namely class frame, subclass frame and instance frame. In our proposed MAS architecture each agents knowledge base is represented by several frames (see Figure 3). Traditional frame hierarchy is kept. Different types of frames describe agent properties, behaviour etc. Usually to describe one concept one frame is used, but in our proposal we use frame set instead of one frame. That provides static and dynamical description of different agent characteristics, behaviour, knowledge etc. Each of MAS agents describing frames is specific data structure. Each agent is represented by one class frame, which contains general information (agent name, superclass name). One class frame can be connected with 0..N procedure frames and contact frames where N is a number of connected frames. Procedure frames store knowledge about reactions to changes in other frames and change slots of other frames according to captured rules about processes simulated. Contact frames store information about agent communication moments and information exchanged. Contact frames have special properties called behaviour frames, which store agents

Figure 4 shows the Tutor agents class frame. Tutor agent has following functions: Deliver course materials (lecture notes, course outlines, reading lists, assignments for each course) according to students learning style and preferences (at first time course material is delivered according to curriculum built in the tutor agent or entered by the human who makes experiments with the system; the material can be evaluated with other materials). Store students learning preferences (keeping track on student-performed actions (mouse cursor movement, link history) and given feedback; preferences help to find appropriate, individual way to represent course material). Identify Students current level of knowledge and skills (identifying of effectiveness of learning by using different testing and assessment methods (Race, 1994)). If we consider that we have defined only one contact frame and one procedure frame, then values N and M is automatically set to 1.
Class frame
Name/identifier Supper class frame name/identifier Properties Name Value Deliver course materials; store student learning preferences; identify student's current level of knowledge and skills. N M Tutor agent Communication agent

to student agent.
Contact frame
Name/identifier Course material delivering

Properties Name Flow name*: Type {input/output}*: Connection with another class frame contact*: Value Course material Output Tutor agent_Student agent

Behavior frame_1: Behavior frame_2:

The combination of the course material

...
Behavior frame_N:

Figure 5. The Tutor agents first contact frame. Figure 6 shows details of previously defined behaviour frame. Parameter name/identifier begins with symbol P and numbers (x, y, z and q) separated with symbols _ and ends with user-defined parameter name. The number is automatically assigned, where x is a class frame index number in the frame system, y is a contact frame index number in particular class frame, z is a behaviour frame index number in particular contact frame and q is a parameter index number. Course material can be combined of a text, some visualizations and audio. In behaviour frame these are defined as parameters P_1_1_1_1_Text, P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation and P_1_1_1_3_Audio, with values 0.65, 0.25 and 0.1 that shows text, visualisation and audio proportion. Internal links show relations between defined parameters, that is important in cases if there are parameters which are not interconnected in bounds of behaviour frame. External links show relations with parameters from another frames.
Behaviour frame
Name/identifier The content combination of the course material Properties

Function*:

Number of Contact frames*: Number of Procedure frames*: Learning strategies: Learning technologies: Pedagogical approaches and methods: Course material delivering order: General information about course (initial course materials): Course contents: Information visualisation techniques and methods: Quiz creation methods, test types:

Name Number of parameters*: Parameter Name/identifier Value 0.65 0.25 0.10

Value 3

N value is computed automatically M - value is computed automatically

Internal link P_1_1_1_2 P_1_1_1_3 P_1_1_1_1 P_1_1_1_3 P_1_1_1_1 P_1_1_1_2

External link P_2_4_3_5

Figure 4. The Tutor agents class frame.

P_1_1_1_1_Text

Figure 5 shows the Tutor agents first contact frame which describes details of course material delivering. As the tutor agent is delivering course materials to student agent, flow name is course material and type of flow is output. We have specified only one behaviour frame about course material combination that can be delivered

P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation P_1_1_1_3_Audio

Figure 6. The Tutor agents first behaviour frame.

Figure 7 shows the Tutor agents first procedure frame, which defines procedures that are called by changes in other slots values.
Procedure frame
Name/identifier Course material delivering changes

Properties Name Number of procedures*: Value 2

Procedure Type Action IF 1_1_1_Text_CURRENT < P_1_1_1_1_Text_LAST THEN P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation = P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation + P_1_1_1_1_Text_LAST P_1_1_1_1_Text_CURRENT ELSE P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation = P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation P_1_1_1_1_Text_CURRENT P_1_1_1_1_Text_LAST IF Course_contents= " " THEN Send_Message: "The course contents are deleted!" AND Course_contents= "Not Available" Description

Related works concerning different intelligent tutoring systems are rather many; they present different architectures of them (Grundspenkis and Anohina, 2005; Capuano et al., 2000; Dorca et al., 2003). Simulation in education mainly is concerned with different animated pedagogical agents. Classical examples of pedagogical agents described in the literature are Adele (Johnson et al., 1998) and Steve (Rickel and Johnson, 1998). Typically animated pedagogical agents emulate the aspects of dialogue between a human teacher and a learner. In field of agentbased simulation of education we have found only SimEd for simulation and modelling of search for the optimal educational policy (Sklar et al., 2004).

If_Changed (GET P_1_1_1_1_Text)

If someone change the parameter P_1_1_1_1_Text then changes the parameter P_1_1_1_2_Visualisation following the defined actions

CONCLUSIONS This paper describes novel approach of how to represent agents included in intelligent tutoring system architecture. We show how to define agents using frame system. We propose to define agents knowledge base with different frames (class frame, contact frame, behaviour frame and procedure frame). Frame system uses structural modelling principles for representing agents in MAS. We show example of proposed frames structures used to describe main issues of the Tutor agent.

If_Deleted (GET Course contents)

If someone delete the property Course_contents then the warning message to the user is sent and a new value for the property assigned

Figure 7. The Tutor agents first procedure frame.

ROLE OF ITS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT REFERENCES Latvian society also definitely moves towards information society, although it happens slowly. Information society is characterized by usage of IT, including Internet. Unfortunately, development is not equal in all regions. At present there are computers in almost all regional centres, libraries, there is Internet connection in many places, and it would be great beginning of developing the region. Different study programs built in intelligent tutoring systems contribute inflow of new knowledge to the region, thus increasing its level of knowledge. Usage of ITS for long time is profitable investment, because people wont need to go away from home to get qualitative education. Education opportunities in regions could promote that working people stay in region rather than going to big cities or abroad, looking for job and education. Capuano, N., M. De Santo, M. Marsella, M. Molinara, and S. Salerno. 2000. A Multi-Agent Architecture for Intelligent Tutoring. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Infrastructure for Electronic Business, Science, and Education on the Internet SSGRR 2000. Dorca, F.A., C.R. Lopes, and M.A. Fernandes. 2003. A Multiagent Architecture for Distance Education Systems In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT03), 2003, pp. 368-369. Garro, A. and L. Palopoli. 2002. An XML Multi-Agent System for e-Learning and Skill Management. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Multi-Agent Systems, Large Complex Systems, and EBusinesses (MALCEB'2002) (Erfurt, Germany), 283-294. Graudina, V. and J. Grundspenkis. 2005. The Role of Ontologies in Agent-Based Simulation of Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Accepted for the 19th European Conference on Modelling and Simulation (June 1-4, 2005, Riga, Latvia).

RELATED WORKS Our search for related works confirms that the proposed approach for describing agents inner structure is a novel approach. In our first paper concerning this approach (Valkovska and Grundspenkis, 2005) we have presented this approach in general. Now we are applying this approach for particular case that describes knowledge bases of agents involved in intelligent tutoring systems.

Grundspenkis, J. 1997. Structural modelling of Complex Technical Systems in Conditions of Incomplete Information. In J. Merkurjevs, L. Rastrigins, G.Vulfs. (Eds.). Modern Aspects of Management Science, No 1. Riga, Latvia, 1997, pp. 111-135. Grundspenkis, J. 2003. Development of Hybrid Intelligent Systems: Integration of Structural Modelling, Intelligent Agents and Knowledge Management Techniques. In Scientific Proceedings of Riga Technical University, 5th Series, Computer Science, Applied Computer Systems, V. 17. Riga, Latvia, 2003. pp. 7-30. Grundspenkis, J. 2004. Reasoning in structural Model Based Diagnosis. Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Quality, Reliability and Maintenance, QRM 2004, Oxford, March 21-22,G.J. Mc Nulty (ed.), Professional Engineering Publicity, London, UK. 2004. 295-298. Grundspenkis, J. and A. Anohina. 2005. Agents in Intelligent Tutoring Systems: State of the Art. Accepted for publishing in Scientific Proceedings of Riga Technical University in 2005. Johnson, W.L. 2003. Using Agent Technology to Improve the Quality of Web-Based Education. In Web Intelligence 2003, N. Zhong; J. Liu; and Y.Y. Yao. (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, 77-101. Johnson, W.L., E. Shaw, R. Ganeshan. 1998. Pedagogical Agents on the Web. Presented in Workshop on WWW-based Tutoring, ITS98, San Antonio, Texas, 1998. Minsky, M. 1975. Framework for Representing Knowledge. In P.H. Winston (Ed.). The Psychology of Computer Vision. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1975, pp. 211-277. Race, P. 1994. The Open Learning Handbook: Promoting quality in designing and delivering flexible learning. Kogan Page Ltd, London, Nichols Publishing Company, New Jersey. 1994. Rickel, J., and W.L. Johnson. 1998. STEVE: A Pedagogical Agent for Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Autonomous Agents, Minneapolis/St. Paul, ACM Press, May 1998. Shen Z., R. Gay., Y. Miao. 2005. Agent-Based eLearning Systems: A Goal-Based Approach. In Leondes C.T. (Ed.). Intelligent Knowledge-Based Systems. Business and Technology in the New Millennium. Vol. 3 Expert and Agent Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2005, pp. 182-197.

Sklar, E., M. Davies, and M.S.T. Co. 2004. SimEd: Simulating Education as a Multi Agent System. In Proceedings of Third International Conference of Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS2004). pp. 998-1005. Valkovska, I. and J. Grundspenkis. 2005. Representation of Complex Agents by Frames for Simulation of Internal Relationships in Structural Modelling. Accepted for the 19th European Conference on Modelling and Simulation (June 1-4, 2005, Riga, Latvia). Weiss, G. (Eds.). 1999. Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Modern Approach to Artificial Intelligence. The MIT Press. 1999. Wooldridge, M.J. 2002. An Introduction to Multi Agent Systems. John Wiley & Sons. 2002.

BIOGRAPHY Vita Graudina is an assistant at Riga Technical University. She is a Master student at Riga Technical University. She is working on the final version of her Master thesis. The topic of the thesis is the usage of ontologies in different intelligent, information and knowledge-based systems. Janis Grundspenkis is a professor at Riga Technical University. He is also the dean of the Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technologies, the director of the Institute of Applied Computed Systems, and the head of the Department of Systems Theory and Design. He got Dr.sc.ing. in 1972, Dr.habil.sc.ing. in 1993 both from Riga Technical University. His research interests are agent technologies, knowledge engineering and management, and structural modelling. He is a member of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). He is a full member of Latvia Academy of Science. Ieva Valkovska is an assistant at Riga Technical University. She is a Master student of Riga Technical University. She is working on the final version of her Master thesis. Her scientific interests are associated with system analysis, design and development of knowledge representation systems and systems for structural modelling.