| Literature DB >> 30678054 |
Fehaid Alqahtani1,2, Naeem Ramzan3.
Abstract
The analysis of physiological signals is ubiquitous in health and medical diagnosis as a primary tool for investigation and inquiry. Physiological signals are now being widely used for psychological and social fields. They have found promising application in the field of computer-based learning and tutoring. Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) is a fast-paced growing field which deals with the design and implementation of customized computer-based instruction and feedback methods without human intervention. This paper introduces the key concepts and motivations behind the use of physiological signals. It presents a detailed discussion and experimental comparison of ITS. The synergism of ITS and physiological signals in automated tutoring systems adapted to the learner's emotions and mental states are presented and compared. The insights are developed, and details are presented. The accuracy and classification methods of existing systems are highlighted as key areas of improvement. High-precision measurement systems and neural networks for machine-learning classification are deemed prospective directions for future improvements to existing systems.Entities:
Keywords: Intelligent Tutoring Systems; electrocardiogram; electroencephalogram; human–computer interaction; physiological signals
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30678054 PMCID: PMC6387072 DOI: 10.3390/s19030460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Architecture of an ITS.
Figure 2Graphical representation of commonly believed effect/impact vs tutoring methods.
Figure 3Different type of ITS [32].
Figure 4ECG probe placement and measurement devices [45].
Figure 5Connections and measurement via an EEG device [46].
Figure 6Various other measurement and contact-less devices [51].
Comparison and results of pre-existing physiological-based learning research.
| Source | Measurement Techniques | Objective | Methodology | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brawner and Goldberg [ | ECG and GSR, | To train bilateral negotiations with ITS, and check stress and anxiety levels via measurement during the learning process | CMT, a web-based prototype Participants interacted via static dialog for a sample size of 35 | Anxiety, boredom, stress, and frustration were checked using GSR. For well-defined, no interruption learning, the average signal densities were lower by 67% compared to interrupted learning, meaning much lower anxiety and stress. |
| Chanel, et al. [ | EEG and plethysmograph, | To assess the impact of stimuli on test subject using the valence-arousal model, using mathematical classifiers | Exposure of 4 test subjects to various videos | The Bayes classifier resulted in an average accuracy of 54% between the test subject’s SAM score and the measured EEG readings. |
| Kim and Andre [ | EMG, ECG, GSR, and Respiration | Emotion recognition of subject based on physiological impact of music listening | Subjects listened to music and classification performed between responses on the valence-arousal model. The classification was performed using a novel emotion-specific multilevel dichotomous classification (EMDC) technique | Emotion recognition on arousal-valence was found to be up to 95% for subject-dependent classification and 70% for subject-dependent classification using the EMDC model which is higher compared to previously established PLDA classifier. |
| Pour, et al. [ | ECG, EMG, GSR | Assess the correlation between physiological responses and self-reported learning by subjects when taught using a feedback-based learning software in the fields of hardware, internet and operating systems | Autotutor, a dialog and feedback-based learning software. | Using support vector machine (SVM) classifier, the classification accuracy for emotions vs. self-reported learning was up to 84% which shows the feasibility of the approach |
| Hussain, et al. [ | ECG, EMG, respiration, and GSR | Establish emotional classification for subjects in terms of categorical (frustration, confusion, etc.) and dimensional (valence-arousal) by interaction with ITS | To achieve the objective, feature extraction from data was implemented in MATLAB [ | Baseline accuracy was established at 33%. For video measurement accuracy was up to 62% for dimensional classification and 45% for categorical classification. For a combination of video and physiological signals, accuracy was up to 64.63% |
| Barron-Estrada, et al. [ | N/A | The paper focuses on analyzing the sentiments of the learner and implement the results in an ITS. | Sentiment Analysis Module, a computer-based system, used to take subject opinions in terms of likes and dislikes and to classify them according to self-reported correctness | Out of 178 subject opinions taken, the correct classification had accuracy of 80.75% |
| Arnau, et al. [ | N/A | Learning of arithmetical problem-solving via intelligent tutoring. Aimed at both expert and novice teachers | By implementing a search technique, the user’s answers were compared against a database of steps, and math problems were presented and solved on a step-by-step basis. | An accuracy of 82.14% was achieved in total out of the 75 subjects. |
| D’Mello and Graesser [ | Direct measurement of expressions | Predicting student emotions such as boredom and engagement while using an ITS named Autotutor. | The research used the Autotutor, a validated ITS that helps students learn topics in science and computing via a mixed conversational dialog between the student and the tutor. There were 28 subjects in this study | The results showed that methods that detect affect in a text by identifying explicit articulations of emotion or by monitoring the valence of its content words are not always viable solutions. |
| Mohanan, et al. [ | Face Detection | To examine the possibility of integrating an emotion detection system within an ITS | A class of subjects was observed while being taught by a teacher. The samples obtained from this method can be used to train the ITS. The ITS assessed the learner’s knowledge and present more challenging or less challenging tasks based on this assessment. | Capturing emotions by means of pictures and videos may not be an effective emotion recognition strategy. Students that are not very expressive, may not find the proposed ITS system effective. A more sophisticated way of identifying emotions can improve the quality of the research. |
| Njeru and Paracha [ | Eye tracking | ITS with the use of model tracing and knowledge tracing, to assess the feasibility of using eye-tracking in learning. | Autotutor, a dialog and feedback-based learning software. Using Autotutor, 16 learners were asked to self-report their learning progress while being monitored for physiological signals | The paper explains how eye-tracking data can be used to detect learning behavior. However, it does not provide enough evidence to show feasibility of this method for emotion detection. |
Figure 7Results from [113] shows the effectiveness of interactive learning compared to other modes of engagement.
Categories and methods of modern ITS.
| ITS | Sensors Used | Classification | Recognized Emotions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Autotutor [ | Video camera Pressure sensitive chair. | Extraction of eye pattern and posture, analysis of log files. Classifiers: C4.5 decision trees, neural networks, Naive Bayes, logistic regression, and nearest neighbor. | Frustrated, confused, bored, and neutral. |
| Cognitive BBN [ | Video camera | Bayesian belief networks | Frustrated, confused, bored, happy, and interested. |
| Algebra Tutor [ | N/A | Feature analysis such as activity history and student behavior. Classifiers: K* algorithm, J48 decision trees, step regression, Naive Bayes, REP-Trees. | Bored, concentrated, frustrated, and confused. |
| Affective learning companions [ | mouse, posture chair, video camera, skin conductance bracelet | Hidden Markov Models, State Vector Machines, and Dynamic Bayesian Networks | Boredom, confusion, flow, and frustration. |
| Dynamic Bayesian Network (DBN) modeler [ | N/A | Analysis of log files, interviews, and surveys. Through DBN emotions are modeled. | Enthusiastic, anxious, frustrated, bored, curious, confused, and focused. |
| Easy Eve [ | Video Camera | Analysis of facial feature. Classifier: SVM. | Scared, surprised, smiling, laughing, disgusted, neutral, angry, and sad. |
| Arroyo’s ITS [ | mouse, posture chair, camera, bracelet | Linear regression. | Confidence, frustration, excitement, interest. |
| EER-Tutor [ | Video Camera | Extraction and tracking of facial features such as eyebrows and lips. Feature classification is carried out via comparing the neutral face with calculated distance for each facial feature. | Happy, angry, smiling, frustrated and neutral emotions. |
| Facial Features-based Tutor [ | Video Camera | Extraction and tracking of facial feature and Regions of Interest (ROI). Classifiers: Fuzzy system, and neural network. | Scared, angry, disgusted, happy, sad, neutral, and surprised. |
| Gnu-Tutor [ | Eye tracker | Analysis of log files, Gaze pattern extraction and eye tracking. | Disinterested, and bored. |
| InqITS [ | N/A | Analysis of log files. Classifiers: step regression, J48 decision trees, JRip. | Concentrated, bored, confused, and frustrated. |
| INES-Tutor [ | N/A | Analysis of the student’s difficulty of the task, activity level, previous progress, number of errors, severity of the error. | Confident, Worried, sad, and enthusiastic. |
| SPOKE [ | Microphone | Extraction of acoustic-prosodic, lexical features and dialog features. Answer accuracy is assessed through semantic analysis. | Negative, positive, and neutral emotions. |
| MathSpring [ | N/A | Analysis of log files, behavior patterns, and self-assessment reports. Classifier: linear regression. | Excited, inactive, confident, worried, interested, bored, satisfied, and frustrated. |
| Meta-Tutor [ | Eye tracker | Extraction of gaze data features. Classifiers: SVM, random forests, logistic regression, and Naive Bayes. | Bored, curious, and interested. |
| PAT [ | Video Camera | Analysis of log files, tracking, and extraction of facial feature points. Classification of motions are done via facial action coding. | Disappointed, happy, sad, satisfied, ashamed, grateful, and angry. |
| Prime-Climb [ | Physiological sensors | Measuring heart rate, muscle activity, skin conductivity. Analyzing Biometric through unsupervised clustering. | Happy, sad (for the game), admiration, criticism (for PA), pride, shame (for himself). |
| VALERIE-Tutor [ | Video camera, mic, physiological sensors | Measuring of skin conductivity, heart rate, extraction of speech, facial features, and analysis of mouse movement. Classifiers: Marquardt Back-propagation algorithm, nearest neighbor, linear discriminant function analysis. | Angry, surprised, sad, scared, amused, and frustrated. |
| Mavrikis’s ITS [ | N/A | Analysis of log files. Classifier: J4.8 decision tree algorithm. | Frustrated, enthusiastic, confused, confident, bored, and happy. |