We study data corruption robustness in offline two-player zero-sum Markov games. Given a dataset of realized trajectories of two players, an adversary is allowed to modify an $\epsilon$-fraction of it. The learner's goal is to identify an approximate Nash Equilibrium policy pair from the corrupted data. We consider this problem in linear Markov games under different degrees of data coverage and corruption. We start by providing an information-theoretic lower bound on the suboptimality gap of any learner. Next, we propose robust versions of the Pessimistic Minimax Value Iteration algorithm, both under coverage on the corrupted data and under coverage only on the clean data, and show that they achieve (near)-optimal suboptimality gap bounds with respect to $\epsilon$. We note that we are the first to provide such a characterization of the problem of learning approximate Nash Equilibrium policies in offline two-player zero-sum Markov games under data corruption.

Reward functions are central in specifying the task we want a reinforcement learning agent to perform. Given a task and desired optimal behavior, we study the problem of designing informative reward functions so that the designed rewards speed up the agent's convergence. In particular, we consider expert-driven reward design settings where an expert or teacher seeks to provide informative and interpretable rewards to a learning agent. Existing works have considered several different reward design formulations; however, the key challenge is formulating a reward informativeness criterion that adapts w.r.t. the agent's current policy and can be optimized under specified structural constraints to obtain interpretable rewards. In this paper, we propose a novel reward informativeness criterion, a quantitative measure that captures how the agent's current policy will improve if it receives rewards from a specific reward function. We theoretically showcase the utility of the proposed informativeness criterion for adaptively designing rewards for an agent. Experimental results on two navigation tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of our adaptive reward informativeness criterion.

We study data corruption robustness for reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) in an offline setting. Given an offline dataset of pairs of trajectories along with feedback about human preferences, an $\varepsilon$-fraction of the pairs is corrupted (e.g., feedback flipped or trajectory features manipulated), capturing an adversarial attack or noisy human preferences. We aim to design algorithms that identify a near-optimal policy from the corrupted data, with provable guarantees. Existing theoretical works have separately studied the settings of corruption robust RL (learning from scalar rewards directly under corruption) and offline RLHF (learning from human feedback without corruption); however, they are inapplicable to our problem of dealing with corrupted data in offline RLHF setting. To this end, we design novel corruption robust offline RLHF methods under various assumptions on the coverage of the data-generating distributions. At a high level, our methodology robustifies an offline RLHF framework by first learning a reward model along with confidence sets and then learning a pessimistic optimal policy over the confidence set. Our key insight is that learning optimal policy can be done by leveraging an offline corruption-robust RL oracle in different ways (e.g., zero-order oracle or first-order oracle), depending on the data coverage assumptions. To our knowledge, ours is the first work that provides provable corruption robust offline RLHF methods.

This survey article has grown out of the GAIED (pronounced "guide") workshop organized by the authors at the NeurIPS 2023 conference. We organized the GAIED workshop as part of a community-building effort to bring together researchers, educators, and practitioners to explore the potential of generative AI for enhancing education. This article aims to provide an overview of the workshop activities and highlight several future research directions in the area of GAIED.

Generative AI and large language models hold great promise in enhancing programming education by automatically generating individualized feedback for students. We investigate the role of generative AI models in providing human tutor-style programming hints to help students resolve errors in their buggy programs. Recent works have benchmarked state-of-the-art models for various feedback generation scenarios; however, their overall quality is still inferior to human tutors and not yet ready for real-world deployment. In this paper, we seek to push the limits of generative AI models toward providing high-quality programming hints and develop a novel technique, GPT4Hints-GPT3.5Val. As a first step, our technique leverages GPT-4 as a ``tutor'' model to generate hints -- it boosts the generative quality by using symbolic information of failing test cases and fixes in prompts. As a next step, our technique leverages GPT-3.5, a weaker model, as a ``student'' model to further validate the hint quality -- it performs an automatic quality validation by simulating the potential utility of providing this feedback. We show the efficacy of our technique via extensive evaluation using three real-world datasets of Python programs covering a variety of concepts ranging from basic algorithms to regular expressions and data analysis using pandas library.

We study optimal teaching of Linear Behavior Cloning (LBC) learners. In this setup, the teacher can select which states to demonstrate to an LBC learner. The learner maintains a version space of infinite linear hypotheses consistent with the demonstration. The goal of the teacher is to teach a realizable target policy to the learner using minimum number of state demonstrations. This number is known as the Teaching Dimension(TD). We present a teaching algorithm called ``Teach using Iterative Elimination(TIE)" that achieves instance optimal TD. However, we also show that finding optimal teaching set computationally is NP-hard. We further provide an approximation algorithm that guarantees an approximation ratio of $\log(|A|-1)$ on the teaching dimension. Finally, we provide experimental results to validate the efficiency and effectiveness of our algorithm.

Student modeling is central to many educational technologies as it enables the prediction of future learning outcomes and targeted instructional strategies. However, open-ended learning environments pose challenges for accurately modeling students due to the diverse behaviors exhibited by students and the absence of a well-defined set of learning skills. To approach these challenges, we explore the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) for in-context student modeling in open-ended learning environments. We introduce a novel framework, LLM-SS, that leverages LLMs for synthesizing student's behavior. More concretely, given a particular student's solving attempt on a reference task as observation, the goal is to synthesize the student's attempt on a target task. Our framework can be combined with different LLMs; moreover, we fine-tune LLMs using domain-specific expertise to boost their understanding of domain background and student behaviors. We evaluate several concrete methods based on LLM-SS using the StudentSyn benchmark, an existing student's attempt synthesis benchmark in visual programming. Experimental results show a significant improvement compared to baseline methods included in the StudentSyn benchmark. Furthermore, our method using the fine-tuned Llama2-70B model improves noticeably compared to using the base model and becomes on par with using the state-of-the-art GPT-4 model.

Generative AI and large language models hold great promise in enhancing computing education by powering next-generation educational technologies for introductory programming. Recent works have studied these models for different scenarios relevant to programming education; however, these works are limited for several reasons, as they typically consider already outdated models or only specific scenario(s). Consequently, there is a lack of a systematic study that benchmarks state-of-the-art models for a comprehensive set of programming education scenarios. In our work, we systematically evaluate two models, ChatGPT (based on GPT-3.5) and GPT-4, and compare their performance with human tutors for a variety of scenarios. We evaluate using five introductory Python programming problems and real-world buggy programs from an online platform, and assess performance using expert-based annotations. Our results show that GPT-4 drastically outperforms ChatGPT (based on GPT-3.5) and comes close to human tutors' performance for several scenarios. These results also highlight settings where GPT-4 still struggles, providing exciting future directions on developing techniques to improve the performance of these models.

Generative AI and large language models have the potential to drastically improve the landscape of computing education by automatically generating personalized feedback and content. Recent works have studied the capabilities of these models for different programming education scenarios; however, these works considered only text-based programming, in particular, Python programming. Consequently, they leave open the question of how well these models would perform in visual programming domains popularly used for K-8 programming education. The main research question we study is: Do state-of-the-art generative models show advanced capabilities in visual programming on par with their capabilities in text-based Python programming? In our work, we evaluate two models, ChatGPT (based on GPT-3.5) and GPT-4, in visual programming domains for various scenarios and assess performance using expert-based annotations. In particular, we base our evaluation using reference tasks from the domains of Hour of Code: Maze Challenge by Code-dot-org and Karel. Our results show that these models perform poorly and struggle to combine spatial, logical, and programming skills crucial for visual programming. These results also provide exciting directions for future work on developing techniques to improve the performance of generative models in visual programming.

We present an information-theoretic framework to learn fixed-dimensional embeddings for tasks in reinforcement learning. We leverage the idea that two tasks are similar to each other if observing an agent's performance on one task reduces our uncertainty about its performance on the other. This intuition is captured by our information-theoretic criterion which uses a diverse population of agents to measure similarity between tasks in sequential decision-making settings. In addition to qualitative assessment, we empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our techniques based on task embeddings by quantitative comparisons against strong baselines on two application scenarios: predicting an agent's performance on a test task by observing its performance on a small quiz of tasks, and selecting tasks with desired characteristics from a given set of options.