Student mistakes in axiomatic proofs fall into three categories and can largely be covered by buggy rules¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? From 40 students' homework, mistakes were classified as oversights (19), conceptual errors (11), and creative rule adaptations (9). → Josje Lodder 2021
q2 i? With a few improvements to the buggy-rule set, LOGAX would cover about 80% of student mistakes with buggy rules. → Josje Lodder 2021 (2)
Evidence¶
Josje Lodder 2021¶
Josje Lodder, Bastiaan Heeren, Johan Jeuring, Wendy Neijenhuis. (2021). Generation and Use of Hints and Feedback in a Hilbert-Style Axiomatic Proof Tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 31:99-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-020-00222-2
q2 · i? · design · r2
Qualitative error analysis of homework from 40 students, classifying mistakes into oversights (19), conceptual errors (11), and creative rule adaptations (9), such as missing parentheses in Axiom b. The authors link this to repair theory, noting students typically make these mistakes when they do not know how to proceed.
"From the homework of 40 students participating in our course we collected a set of mistakes, and classified these mistakes in three categories"
Josje Lodder 2021 (2)¶
Josje Lodder, Bastiaan Heeren, Johan Jeuring, Wendy Neijenhuis. (2021). Generation and Use of Hints and Feedback in a Hilbert-Style Axiomatic Proof Tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 31:99-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-020-00222-2
q2 · i? · design · r2
The article states that with a few improvements in the design of the buggy-rule set, LOGAX will cover about 80% of student mistakes; the buggy rules were defined from homework solutions, mostly concerning Modus Ponens applications. No effect size is printed.
"With a few improvements in the design of the set of buggy rules, LOGAX will cover about 80% of the mistakes made by students by buggy rules."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Students struggle with constructing axiomatic proofs substantially more than with semantic tableaux in the same logic course — related
- Students' algebra mal-rules are used very irregularly, are severely skewed in frequency, and differ in explanatory power from school to school — related
- Dynamically generated proof graphs let LOGAX recognize all correct student solutions and give hints on them — related
- Proofs generated by LOGAX are comparable to expert proofs — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
buggy-rules-cover-student-mistakes |
title |
Student mistakes in axiomatic proofs fall into three categories and can largely be covered by buggy rules |
description |
Student mistakes in axiomatic proofs fall into three categories and can largely be covered by buggy rules |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — josje-lodder-2021, josje-lodder-2021-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.