DICE: Decoupling Capability from Intervention Necessity in LLM Tutoring
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Fluent guidance is not the same as useful intervention. LLM tutors are typically trained to generate the next teacher utterance, implicitly assuming that every student turn warrants a response. However, our experiments indicate that this conflates tutoring capability (what to say) with intervention necessity (whether to say it). We introduce DICE, a framework that decouples intervention decisions from response generation by first selecting an explicit pedagogical action. To calibrate this action selection policy, we define Intervention Value (IV), a rollout-grounded counterfactual metric that compares each action against non-intervention. IV shows that many prescribed interventions provide little or no marginal benefit. We further introduce DICE-Bench, a multi-variant math tutoring benchmark with skill-preserving problem variants for session-level evaluation. Using IV-weighted and KL-regularized policy optimization, DICE learns to intervene selectively while preserving tutoring effectiveness. In simulated tutoring sessions, DICE reduces the over-intervention rate to near zero while guiding students to correct solutions in approximately 3-4 fewer turns on average than existing Socratic tutoring baselines.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2026.
Builds on
25 of 46 references.
References · 25
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2019Advantage-Weighted Regression: Simple and Scalable Off-Policy Reinforcement Learningcited by 782
- 2022Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoningcited by 388
- 2022Teaching Small Language Models to Reasoncited by 284
- 2023Specializing Smaller Language Models towards Multi-Step Reasoningcited by 251
- 2022Can language models learn from explanations in context?cited by 249
- 2020Evaluating Explainable AI: Which Algorithmic Explanations Help Users Predict Model Behavior?cited by 190
- 2023MathDial: A Dialogue Tutoring Dataset with Rich Pedagogical Properties Grounded in Math Reasoning Problemscited by 131
- 2018Do Explanations make VQA Models more Predictable to a Human?cited by 52
- 2025Training LLM-based Tutors to Improve Student Learning Outcomes in Dialoguescited by 43
13 more
- 2024Stepwise Verification and Remediation of Student Reasoning Errors with Large Language Model Tutorscited by 41
- 2024Towards the Pedagogical Steering of Large Language Models for Tutoring: A Case Study with Modeling Productive Failurecited by 24
- 2025Training Turn-by-Turn Verifiers for Dialogue Tutoring Agents: The Curious Case of LLMs as Your Coding Tutorscited by 20
- 2025From Problem-Solving to Teaching Problem-Solving: Aligning LLMs with Pedagogy using Reinforcement Learningcited by 17
- 2023Can Language Models Teach Weaker Agents? Teacher Explanations Improve Students via Personalizationcited by 16
- 2024Boosting Large Language Models with Socratic Method for Conversational Mathematics Teachingcited by 16
- 2024Instruct, Not Assist: LLM-based Multi-Turn Planning and Hierarchical Questioning for Socratic Code Debuggingcited by 14
- 2025Intent Matters: Enhancing AI Tutoring with Fine-Grained Pedagogical Intent Annotationcited by 8
- 2024TPD: Enhancing Student Language Model Reasoning via Principle Discovery and Guidancecited by 6
- 2024INTERACT: Enabling Interactive, Question-Driven Learning in Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2024Beyond Discrete Personas: Personality Modeling Through Journal Intensive Conversationscited by 5
- 2026From Solver to Tutor: Evaluating the Pedagogical Intelligence of LLMs with KMP-Benchcited by 2
- 2026Turning Back Without Forgetting: Selective Backward Refinement for Parameter-Efficient Continual Learningcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.