Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Representing expertise accelerates learning from pedagogical interaction data

Published 14 Apr 2026 in cs.CL and cs.MA | (2604.12195v1)

Abstract: Work in cognitive science and artificial intelligence has suggested that exposing learning agents to traces of interaction between multiple individuals can improve performance in a variety of settings, yet it remains unknown which features of interactions contribute to this improvement. We examined the factors that support the effectiveness of interaction data, using a controlled paradigm that allowed us to precisely operationalize key distinctions between interaction and an expert acting alone. We generated synthetic datasets of simple interactions between an expert and a novice in a spatial navigation task, and then trained transformer models on those datasets, evaluating performance after exposure to different datasets. Our experiments showed that models trained on pedagogical interactions were more robust across a variety of scenarios compared to models trained only on expert demonstrations, and that having the ability to represent epistemically distinct agents led to expert-like behavior even when expert behavior was rarely observed.

Summary

  • The paper demonstrates that incorporating expert interventions in interaction traces improves agents' recovery in previously unseen, hazardous states.
  • It employs transformer-based models on grid-navigation tasks with explicit agent identity tokens to contrast expert-only and interaction data.
  • Findings underscore that clear epistemic labeling accelerates expert-like performance under data scarcity and informs future multi-agent training strategies.

Summarizing “Representing expertise accelerates learning from pedagogical interaction data”

Introduction and Motivation

This paper investigates how the structural properties of pedagogical interaction traces influence a learning agent’s ability to generalize and recover in challenging tasks, specifically in the context of transformer-based sequence models. Drawing on insights from cognitive science and AI, the study contrasts direct expert-only demonstrations with interaction data, where a knowledgeable agent intervenes on a novice’s suboptimal behavior. The research explores two main questions: (1) What advantages does interaction data offer beyond expert-only demonstrations, especially in regions of the state space not typically traversed by experts? (2) How does the explicit representation of agent identity (expert vs. novice) in the data affect downstream performance, especially under conditions of expert-data scarcity?

Experimental Methodology

The authors utilize a grid-based navigation task, formulated as an MDP, where agents must reach a goal while avoiding high-cost cells. Datasets are synthetically generated: expert-only trajectories follow the optimal policy, while interaction trajectories consist of a novice policy with expert corrective interventions upon repeated entry into high-cost states. The transformer models are trained with these datasets and evaluated across three trial categories:

  • Safe: Start and goal are non-hazardous, and both policies agree.
  • Hazardous: Start and goal are non-hazardous, but novice policy would traverse hazardous cells.
  • Recovery: Start state is hazardous, requiring recovery not observed in expert-only behavior.

Performance metrics include exact path match to the optimal trajectory and completion accuracy (reaching the goal via a valid trajectory).

Additionally, a key manipulation introduces agent-identity tokens (“expert”, “novice”) at relevant segments within the sequences, enabling the model to distinguish the source of each action in the training data.

Main Results

Robustness through Interaction

Models trained with interaction traces consistently outperform those trained solely on expert-only data in recovery scenarios—when the agent’s initial state is outside the expert’s typical distribution. While expert-only data conferred better performance in safe trials, interaction-trained models excelled at producing valid, often optimal, recovery trajectories despite never observing these specific cases during training. This demonstrates the value of exposure to corrective events enabled by information asymmetries in pedagogical settings.

A notable trade-off emerges:

  • Expert-only data: Leads to strong performance in familiar, well-sampled regions.
  • Interaction data: Facilitates generalization and recovery, enabling the agent to act reasonably in rarely—or never—seen circumstances.

However, in hazardous trials (where optimal behavior requires proactively avoiding high-cost states), models trained solely on interaction data do not always internalize expert avoidance strategies. This result indicates that naive learning from interaction traces alone is insufficient for generalized expert-like policy acquisition.

Explicit Agent Representation

A significant improvement in hazardous trial performance is observed when agent-source indicators are incorporated. In data-scarce regimes (e.g., expert-only data comprising ≤0.5% of all traces), models trained on datasets with explicit agent-type tokens and elicited with an expert cue achieve a 30% optimal trajectory rate, in stark contrast to near-zero success without source indicators. This demonstrates that the ability to represent epistemic distinctions between agents—i.e., structuring data with agent identity—accelerates expert-like behavior even under expert demonstration scarcity.

Moreover, when training incorporates partial source information (tags appear only probabilistically), models exhibit increased robustness, generalizing beyond reliance on explicit cues.

Content over Quantity

Further experiments clarify that the advantage conferred by interaction data is due to the structural content of the traces, rather than simply increased data volume or sequence length. Token-matched comparisons confirm that the diversity of state encounters and corrective sub-trajectories, rather than raw token counts, underpin improved generalization.

Implications and Future Directions

This work underlines two core insights for both cognitive modeling and AI:

  1. Learning from trajectories containing expert interventions on novices enhances an agent’s ability to generalize and recover in unobserved or adversarial regions of the state space.
  2. Explicitly representing the epistemic status of data generators—via agent tags or other means—unlocks capabilities otherwise unobtainable, especially when optimal demonstrations are rare.

Practically, these findings have direct implications for training LLMs and RL agents on multi-agent or pedagogically enriched corpora. The results suggest that exposing models to richly annotated pedagogical interactions (such as dialogue threads with clear signaling of participant expertise) may help RL and language agents to synthesize robust policies from limited direct demonstration.

Theoretically, the study strengthens the argument for integrating social inference and agent modeling capacities into future AI architectures, especially for settings with data imbalance or partial observability. Future research should validate these effects on naturalistic interaction data and more complex, sparsely sampled tasks, as well as investigate mechanisms for integrating less explicit agent cues via unsupervised or contrastive pretraining.

Conclusion

The paper provides compelling evidence that structural features of pedagogical interaction data—specifically the inclusion of expert-novice correction sequences and explicit agent differentiation—substantially accelerate robust learning in transformer architectures. These findings support a broader paradigm wherein future AI training regimens should leverage social structure and epistemic annotation in multi-agent data to enhance both generalization and sample efficiency, particularly in domains characterized by expert data scarcity or complex state spaces (2604.12195).

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.