The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.02 - April-June (2009 vol.2)
pp: 148-156
Emilio Remolina , Stottler Henke Associates, San Mateo
Sowmya Ramachandran , Stottler Henke Associates, San Mateo
Richard Stottler , Stottler Henke Associates, San Mateo
Alex Davis , Stottler Henke Associates, San Mateo
ABSTRACT
This paper describes a deployed simulation-based Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) for training of Tactical Action Officers (TAOs). The TAO on board a Navy ship is responsible for the operation of the entire watch team manning the ship's command center. The ITS goal is to train the TAO in “command by negation,” in which watchstanders perform their duties autonomously, while the TAO supervises, intervening in order to correct mistakes and rectify omissions. The ITS uses artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to provide Automated Role Players (ARPs) representing the watchstanders in the ship, and to provide a Natural Language interface to communicate with these automated teammates. An adaptive coaching strategy is used to provide coaching and feedback during an exercise. The paper presents a discussion of the ITS instructional design, its architecture, and the AI techniques it employs.
INDEX TERMS
Artificial intelligence applications, computer-assisted instruction, intelligent tutoring systems.
CITATION
Emilio Remolina, Sowmya Ramachandran, Richard Stottler, Alex Davis, "Rehearsing Naval Tactical Situations Using Simulated Teammates and an Automated Tutor", IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol.2, no. 2, pp. 148-156, April-June 2009, doi:10.1109/TLT.2009.24
REFERENCES
[1] Foundations of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, M.C. Polson and J.J.Richardson, eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., 1988.
[2] B. Woolf, Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors: Student-Centered Strategies for Revolutionizing E-Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2008.
[3] R. Stottler and S. Panichas, “A New Generation of Tactical Action Officer Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS),” Proc. Industry/Interservice, Training, Simulation and Education Conf. (I/ITSEC), 2006.
[4] R. Stottler, A. Davis, S. Panichas, and M. Treadwell, “Designing and Implementing Intelligent Tutoring Instruction for Tactical Action Officers,” Proc. Industry/Interservice, Training, Simulation and Education Conf. (I/ITSEC), 2007.
[5] S. Ramachandran, E. Remolina, and D. Fu, “Flexitrainer: A Visual Authoring Framework for Case-Based Intelligent Tutoring Systems,” Proc. Seventh Int'l Conf. Intelligent Tutoring, pp. 848-850, 2004.
[6] M.J. Wooldridge, An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
[7] B. Chandrasekaran, J.R. Josephson, and V.R. Benjamins, “What Are Ontologies, and Why Do We Need Them?” IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 20-26, Jan. 1999.
[8] D. Fu and R. Houlette, “Putting AI in Entertainment: An AI Authoring Tool for Simulations and Games,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 81-84, July/Aug. 2002.
[9] D. Fu, R. Houlette, and J. Ludwig, “An AI Modeling Tool for Designers and Developers,” Proc. IEEE Aerospace Conf., 2007.
[10] Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Robotics, D. Kortenkamp, R.P.Bonasso, and R. Murphy, eds. MIT Press, 1998.
[11] R.A. Brooks, “Intelligence without Representation,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 47, pp. 139-160, 1991.
[12] R. Stottler and S. Ramachandran, “A Case-Based Reasoning Approach to Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) and ITS Authoring,” Proc. FLAIRS Conf. Special Track on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 1999.
[13] J.R. Anderson, “The Expert Module,” Handbook of Intelligent Training Systems, M. Polson and J. Richardson, eds., pp. 21-53, Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., 1988.
[14] W.L. Johnson, J.W. Rickel, and J.C. Lester, “Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments,” Int'l J. Artificial Intelligence in Education, vol. 11, pp. 47-78, 2000.
[15] D. Traum, J.W. Rickel, J. Gratch, and S. Marsella, “Negotiation over Tasks in Hyrid Human-Agent Teams for Simulation-Based Training,” Proc. Int'l Joint Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 44-448, 2003.
[16] Making Decisions Under Stress: Implications for Individual and Team Training, J.A. Cannon-Bowers and E. Salas, eds. APA Books, 1998.
[17] J. Scolaro and T. Santarelli, “Cognitive Modeling Teamwork, Taskwork, and Instructional Behavior in Synthetic Teammates,” Proc. 11th Conf. Computer Generated Forces, 2002.
[18] W. Zachary, T. Santarelli, J. Ryder, J. Stokes, D. Scolaro, D. Lyons, M. Bergondy, and J. Johnston, “Using a Community of Intelligent Synthetic Entities to Support Operational Team Training,” Proc. 10th Conf. Computer Generated Forces, pp. 215-224, 2001.
[19] A.S. Rao and M.P. Geofgeff, “Modeling Rational Agents within a BDI Architecture,” Proc. Second Int'l Conf. Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 473-484, 1991.
[20] M. Tamble, “Towards Flexible Teamwork,” J. Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 7, pp. 83-124, 1997.
[21] J. Yen, J. Yin, T.R. Ioerger, M.S. Miller, D. Xu, and R.A. Volz, “CAST: Collaborative Agents for Simulating Teamwork,” Proc. Int'l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1135-1142, 2001.
[22] B. Grosz and S. Kraus, “Collaborative Plans for Complex Group Action,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 86, pp. 269-357, 1996.
[23] P.R. Cohen and H.J. Levesque, “Teamwork,” Nous, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 487-512, 1991.
[24] J. Laird, A. Newell, and P. Rosembloom, “Soar: An Architecture for General Intelligence,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1-64, 1987.
18 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool