Date
Publisher
arXiv
In the era of personalized education, the provision of comprehensible
explanations for learning recommendations is of a great value to enhance the
learner's understanding and engagement with the recommended learning content.
Large language models (LLMs) and generative AI in general have recently opened
new doors for generating human-like explanations, for and along learning
recommendations. However, their precision is still far away from acceptable in
a sensitive field like education. To harness the abilities of LLMs, while still
ensuring a high level of precision towards the intent of the learners, this
paper proposes an approach to utilize knowledge graphs (KG) as a source of
factual context, for LLM prompts, reducing the risk of model hallucinations,
and safeguarding against wrong or imprecise information, while maintaining an
application-intended learning context. We utilize the semantic relations in the
knowledge graph to offer curated knowledge about learning recommendations. With
domain-experts in the loop, we design the explanation as a textual template,
which is filled and completed by the LLM. Domain experts were integrated in the
prompt engineering phase as part of a study, to ensure that explanations
include information that is relevant to the learner. We evaluate our approach
quantitatively using Rouge-N and Rouge-L measures, as well as qualitatively
with experts and learners. Our results show an enhanced recall and precision of
the generated explanations compared to those generated solely by the GPT model,
with a greatly reduced risk of generating imprecise information in the final
learning explanation.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can structured factual knowledge help AI generate more accurate explanations for learning recommendations?
- Setting and data: Domain experts and learners (counts, location, and dates not stated in the abstract)
- Method: Automated text similarity evaluation and qualitative reviews with experts and learners
Why it matters
Comprehensible explanations for learning recommendations enhance learner understanding and engagement. However, large language models risk generating hallucinations and imprecise information, leaving their precision far from acceptable in sensitive educational settings.
Key findings
- Supplying language models with structured factual context yielded higher accuracy and completeness in learning recommendation explanations than using a standalone generative model.
- Grounding language models with structured factual knowledge greatly reduced the risk of generating imprecise or incorrect information in learning explanations.
- Standalone generative language models showed precision levels that were far below acceptable standards for educational settings.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
