The capability of large language models (LLMs) to generate, debug, and explain code has sparked the interest of researchers and educators in undergraduate programming, with many anticipating their transformative potential in programming education. However, decisions about why and how to use LLMs in programming education may involve more than just the assessment of an LLM's technical capabilities. Using the social shaping of technology theory as a guiding framework, our study explores how students' social perceptions influence their own LLM usage. We then examine the correlation of self-reported LLM usage with students' self-efficacy and midterm performances in an undergraduate programming course. Triangulating data from an anonymous end-of-course student survey (n = 158), a mid-course self-efficacy survey (n=158), student interviews (n = 10), self-reported LLM usage on homework, and midterm performances, we discovered that students' use of LLMs was associated with their expectations for their future careers and their perceptions of peer usage. Additionally, early self-reported LLM usage in our context correlated with lower self-efficacy and lower midterm scores, while students' perceived over-reliance on LLMs, rather than their usage itself, correlated with decreased self-efficacy later in the course.

Recently, various pre-training methods have been introduced in vision-based Reinforcement Learning (RL). However, their generalization ability remains unclear due to evaluations being limited to in-distribution environments and non-unified experimental setups. To address this, we introduce the Atari Pre-training Benchmark (Atari-PB), which pre-trains a ResNet-50 model on 10 million transitions from 50 Atari games and evaluates it across diverse environment distributions. Our experiments show that pre-training objectives focused on learning task-agnostic features (e.g., identifying objects and understanding temporal dynamics) enhance generalization across different environments. In contrast, objectives focused on learning task-specific knowledge (e.g., identifying agents and fitting reward functions) improve performance in environments similar to the pre-training dataset but not in varied ones. We publicize our codes, datasets, and model checkpoints at https://github.com/dojeon-ai/Atari-PB.

This work investigates the online machine learning problem of prediction with expert advice in an adversarial setting through numerical analysis of, and experiments with, a related partial differential equation. The problem is a repeated two-person game involving decision-making at each step informed by $n$ experts in an adversarial environment. The continuum limit of this game over a large number of steps is a degenerate elliptic equation whose solution encodes the optimal strategies for both players. We develop numerical methods for approximating the solution of this equation in relatively high dimensions ($n\leq 10$) by exploiting symmetries in the equation and the solution to drastically reduce the size of the computational domain. Based on our numerical results we make a number of conjectures about the optimality of various adversarial strategies, in particular about the non-optimality of the COMB strategy.

Although explainability is essential in the clinical diagnosis, most deep learning models still function as black boxes without elucidating their decision-making process. In this study, we investigate the explainable model development that can mimic the decision-making process of human experts by fusing the domain knowledge of explicit diagnostic criteria. We introduce a simple yet effective framework, Explicd, towards Explainable language-informed criteria-based diagnosis. Explicd initiates its process by querying domain knowledge from either large language models (LLMs) or human experts to establish diagnostic criteria across various concept axes (e.g., color, shape, texture, or specific patterns of diseases). By leveraging a pretrained vision-language model, Explicd injects these criteria into the embedding space as knowledge anchors, thereby facilitating the learning of corresponding visual concepts within medical images. The final diagnostic outcome is determined based on the similarity scores between the encoded visual concepts and the textual criteria embeddings. Through extensive evaluation of five medical image classification benchmarks, Explicd has demonstrated its inherent explainability and extends to improve classification performance compared to traditional black-box models.

We evaluate an automatic hint generator for CS1 programming assignments powered by GPT-4, a large language model. This system provides natural language guidance about how students can improve their incorrect solutions to short programming exercises. A hint can be requested each time a student fails a test case. Our evaluation addresses three Research Questions: RQ1: Do the hints help students improve their code? RQ2: How effectively do the hints capture problems in student code? RQ3: Are the issues that students resolve the same as the issues addressed in the hints? To address these research questions quantitatively, we identified a set of fine-grained knowledge components and determined which ones apply to each exercise, incorrect solution, and generated hint. Comparing data from two large CS1 offerings, we found that access to the hints helps students to address problems with their code more quickly, that hints are able to consistently capture the most pressing errors in students' code, and that hints that address a few issues at once rather than a single bug are more likely to lead to direct student progress.

In unsupervised environment design, reinforcement learning agents are trained on environment configurations (levels) generated by an adversary that maximises some objective. Regret is a commonly used objective that theoretically results in a minimax regret (MMR) policy with desirable robustness guarantees; in particular, the agent's maximum regret is bounded. However, once the agent reaches this regret bound on all levels, the adversary will only sample levels where regret cannot be further reduced. Although there are possible performance improvements to be made outside of these regret-maximising levels, learning stagnates. In this work, we introduce Bayesian level-perfect MMR (BLP), a refinement of the minimax regret objective that overcomes this limitation. We formally show that solving for this objective results in a subset of MMR policies, and that BLP policies act consistently with a Perfect Bayesian policy over all levels. We further introduce an algorithm, ReMiDi, that results in a BLP policy at convergence. We empirically demonstrate that training on levels from a minimax regret adversary causes learning to prematurely stagnate, but that ReMiDi continues learning.

Diffusion models have shown exceptional capabilities in generating realistic videos. Yet, their training has been predominantly confined to offline environments where models can repeatedly train on i.i.d. data to convergence. This work explores the feasibility of training diffusion models from a semantically continuous video stream, where correlated video frames sequentially arrive one at a time. To investigate this, we introduce two novel continual video generative modeling benchmarks, Lifelong Bouncing Balls and Windows 95 Maze Screensaver, each containing over a million video frames generated from navigating stationary environments. Surprisingly, our experiments show that diffusion models can be effectively trained online using experience replay, achieving performance comparable to models trained with i.i.d. samples given the same number of gradient steps.

The integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools into education has been a game-changer for teaching and assessment practices, bringing new opportunities, but also novel challenges which need to be dealt with. This paper presents the Comprehensive AI Assessment Framework (CAIAF), an evolved version of the AI Assessment Scale (AIAS) by Perkins, Furze, Roe, and MacVaugh, targeted toward the ethical integration of AI into educational assessments. This is where the CAIAF differs, as it incorporates stringent ethical guidelines, with clear distinctions based on educational levels, and advanced AI capabilities of real-time interactions and personalized assistance. The framework developed herein has a very intuitive use, mainly through the use of a color gradient that enhances the user-friendliness of the framework. Methodologically, the framework has been developed through the huge support of a thorough literature review and practical insight into the topic, becoming a dynamic tool to be used in different educational settings. The framework will ensure better learning outcomes, uphold academic integrity, and promote responsible use of AI, hence the need for this framework in modern educational practice.

Large language models have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various natural language processing tasks, especially in solving mathematical problems. However, large language models are not good at math theorem proving using formal languages like Lean. A significant challenge in this area is the scarcity of training data available in these formal languages. To address this issue, we propose a novel pipeline that iteratively generates and filters synthetic data to translate natural language mathematical problems into Lean 4 statements, and vice versa. Our results indicate that the synthetic data pipeline can provide useful training data and improve the performance of LLMs in translating and understanding complex mathematical problems and proofs. Our final dataset contains about 57K formal-informal question pairs along with searched proof from the math contest forum and 21 new IMO questions.

Publications proposing novel machine learning methods are often primarily rated by exhibited predictive performance on selected problems. In this position paper we argue that predictive performance alone is not a good indicator for the worth of a publication. Using it as such even fosters problems like inefficiencies of the machine learning research community as a whole and setting wrong incentives for researchers. We therefore put out a call for the publication of "negative" results, which can help alleviate some of these problems and improve the scientific output of the machine learning research community. To substantiate our position, we present the advantages of publishing negative results and provide concrete measures for the community to move towards a paradigm where their publication is normalized.