Date
Publisher
arXiv
Large language models (LLMs) are shifting from answer providers to intelligent tutors in educational settings, yet current supervised fine-tuning methods only learn surface teaching patterns without dynamic adaptation capabilities. Recent reinforcement learning approaches address this limitation but face two critical challenges. First, they evaluate teaching effectiveness solely based on whether students produce correct outputs, unable to distinguish whether students genuinely understand or echo teacher-provided answers during interaction. Second, they cannot perceive students' evolving cognitive states in real time through interactive dialogue, thus failing to adapt teaching strategies to match students' cognitive levels dynamically. We propose the Unidirectional Cognitive Optimization (UCO) method to address these challenges. UCO uses a multi-turn interactive reinforcement learning paradigm where the innovation lies in two synergistic reward functions: the Progress Reward captures students' cognitive advancement, evaluating whether students truly transition from confusion to comprehension, while the Scaffold Reward dynamically identifies each student's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), encouraging teachers to maintain productive teaching within this zone. We evaluate UCO by comparing it against 11 baseline models on BigMath and MathTutorBench benchmarks. Experimental results demonstrate that our UCO model outperforms all models of equivalent scale and achieves performance comparable to advanced closed-source models. The code and data are available at https://github.com/Mind-Lab-ECNU/UCO.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can reinforcement learning optimize AI tutors to adapt guidance to students' cognitive progress without revealing answers?
- Setting and data: Simulated multi-turn math tutoring using 2,000 BigMath training problems, 500 test questions, MathTutorBench, and MathDial, evaluated with three human teachers on 100 problems.
- Method: Multi-turn reinforcement learning (Group Relative Policy Optimization) with benchmark evaluation, ablation studies, and human assessment.
Why it matters
AI tutors often rely on answer correctness rather than genuine understanding, failing to detect student cognitive states or adapt teaching strategies across multi-turn dialogues.
Key findings
- The 7B UCO model achieved a 30.2 percent problem-solving improvement rate and reduced solution leakage to 12.9 percent on BigMath, outperforming equivalent-scale models.
- In teacher evaluations on 100 BigMath dialogues, UCO achieved a 0.69 win rate against GPT-4o by providing progressive scaffolding rather than direct answers.
- Removing scaffolding rewards caused solve rate improvements to drop from 30.2 percent to 23.5 percent while increasing solution leakage from 12.9 percent to 20.2 percent.
Summary drafted with AI from the full paper 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
