In Clarke, M. R. B. (Ed.), Advances in Computer Chess 2, pp. 103-109. Edinburgh University Press

In AAAI-80, pp. 102–104.

ACM Computing Survey 12:213-253

ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 2(1): 90-121.

Proc. Canadian Soc. for Computational Studies of Intelligence, Univ. Victoria, Victoria, BC (1980)

Earlier version in IJCAI 6 (1979). Artificial Intelligence, 14 (2), 165-203.

Computer-based tutoring/coaching systems have the promise of enhancing the educational value of gaming environments by guiding a student's discovery learning. This paper provides an in-depth view of (i) the philosophy behind such systems, (ii) the kinds of diagnostic modeling strategies required to infer a student's shortcomings from observing his behavior and (iii) the range of explicit tutorial strategies needed for directing the Tutor to say the right thing at the right time. Examples of these issues are drawn for a computer-based coaching system for a simple game-How the West was Won. Our intention in writing this paper is to make explicit the vast amounts of tutorial knowledge required to construct a coaching system that is robust, friendly and intelligent enough to survive in home or classroom use. During the past three years, we have witnessed how subtle the computer-based coaching problem really is.

This chapter focuses on ACT system that embodies the extremely powerful thesis that a single set of learning processes underlies the whole gamut of human learning—from children learning their first language by hearing examples of adult speech to adults learning to program a computer by reading textbook instructions. The computer simulation is called ACT. The ACT theory describes its application to research on abstraction of schemas. In ACT, knowledge is divided into two categories: declarative and procedural. The declarative knowledge is represented in a propositional network similar to semantic network representations.

This work is an attempt to formally represent the knowledge required for the solution of a difficult retrograde chess problem (figure I). This solution Includes the extension of a formal deductive system to Include an observational facility. FOL [9], we have detailed a proof of the solution of the puzzle, Including proofs for almost all of the necessary associated lemmas [2], We shall highlight the various representational decisions made In the process of axiomatiiing retrograde chess, discussing both the necessity for these particular choices, and their Implications for designers of representations for other domains. This work is part of the search for epistemologically effective formalisms for artificial Intelligence.

This approach leads to an infinite sequence of algorithms I. Surface Models