Adaptive Question Generation for Automated Educational Tools

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing multiple choice questions in educational tools often lack appropriate difficulty levels, leading to user frustration or guessing based on patterns rather than understanding the material, as they are not carefully crafted and may contain giveaway phrasing or invalid distractors.

Innovation Solution

An automated educational tool that analyzes educational material, generates inattentive user assessment questions by parsing and modifying existing questions, and dynamically increases question difficulty based on user attention monitoring, using techniques such as generating new questions, modifying existing ones, and training machine learning models to ensure users answer based on understanding rather than guessing.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If multiple choice questions are used with predetermined answers, then user input requirement is reduced and answer validation is simplified, but question difficulty control becomes difficult and guessing based on patterns increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser input requirementVSAvoidassessment validity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically generates and modifies multiple choice questions based on user performance patterns, transforming the static question bank into an adaptive assessment system that adjusts question difficulty and distractor quality in real-time to prevent guessing while maintaining ease of operation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes parameters of questions including distractor semantics, question phrasing, and difficulty level based on detected user guessing patterns, thereby maintaining assessment validity without increasing user input requirements

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If questions are made too difficult, then assessment validity improves, but user frustration increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveassessment validityVSAvoiduser frustration
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts question difficulty based on user performance, transitioning from static to adaptive difficulty levels that challenge users appropriately without causing frustration from excessively difficult questions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Object-affected harmful factors

If questions are made too simple, then user frustration decreases, but users can answer correctly without actually understanding the material

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser frustrationVSAvoidassessment validity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts question complexity to maintain optimal challenge levels, ensuring questions are neither too easy to guess nor too difficult to answer, thereby maintaining both user motivation and assessment validity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from user answer patterns to detect guessing behavior and adjusts subsequent question difficulty accordingly, creating a closed-loop system that maintains appropriate challenge levels

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Ease of operation

If distractors are made very different from correct answers, then answer validation is simplified, but users don't need to read closely to choose correct answers

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanswer validationVSAvoidattention assessment
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes the semantic parameters of distractors to create near-identical alternatives that require close reading and careful attention, transforming clearly distinguishable distractors into subtle alternatives that assess genuine understanding

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

5Reliability

If authors focus more time on crafting questions, then question quality improves, but time consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequestion qualityVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables automated question generation and optimization, allowing the assessment system to self-improve question quality through algorithmic generation and pattern-based optimization rather than relying solely on manual authoring

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system automatically optimizes question parameters including distractor selection, phrasing, and difficulty levels through algorithmic processes, achieving high question quality without manual intervention

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS11164473B2Generating probing questions to test attention to automated educational materials
Publication Date: 2021.11.02 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION
  • US11164473B2 patent drawing
  • US11164473B2 patent drawing
  • US11164473B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method, apparatus and program product utilize an automated educational tool to generate or modify one or more multiple choice questions in a question set in connection with tracking a user's attention state to dynamically vary the difficulty of a user assessment performed by the automated educational tool and thereby encourage the user to pay greater attention to the material being presented to the user.