Spaces:
Sleeping
Sleeping
A newer version of the Gradio SDK is available:
6.2.0
🔬 Eidolon Cognitive Tutor - Research Lab Roadmap
Vision: Showcase Cutting-Edge AI/ML Research in Education
Transform the tutor into a living research demonstration that visualizes state-of-the-art AI concepts, inspired by recent breakthrough papers (2020-2024).
🎯 Core Research Themes
1. Explainable AI & Interpretability
Show users HOW the AI thinks, not just WHAT it outputs
🧠 Cognitive Architecture Visualization
Papers:
- "Attention is All You Need" (Vaswani et al., 2017)
- "A Mathematical Framework for Transformer Circuits" (Elhage et al., 2021)
- "Interpretability in the Wild" (Anthropic, 2023)
Implementation:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 🧠 COGNITIVE PROCESS VIEWER │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Query: "Explain quantum entanglement" │
│ │
│ [1] Token Attention Heatmap │
│ ████████░░░░ "quantum" → physics │
│ ██████████░░ "entangle" → connect │
│ │
│ [2] Knowledge Retrieval │
│ ↳ Quantum Mechanics (0.94) │
│ ↳ Bell's Theorem (0.87) │
│ ↳ EPR Paradox (0.81) │
│ │
│ [3] Reasoning Chain │
│ Think: Need simple analogy │
│ → Retrieve: coin flip metaphor │
│ → Synthesize: connected particles │
│ → Verify: scientifically accurate │
│ │
│ [4] Confidence: 89% ±3% │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
Features:
- Real-time attention weight visualization
- Interactive layer-by-layer activation inspection
- Concept activation mapping
- Neuron-level feature visualization
2. Meta-Learning & Few-Shot Adaptation
Demonstrate how AI learns to learn
🎓 Adaptive Learning System
Papers:
- "Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML)" (Finn et al., 2017)
- "Learning to Learn by Gradient Descent" (Andrychowicz et al., 2016)
- "Meta-Learning with Implicit Gradients" (Rajeswaran et al., 2019)
Implementation:
class MetaLearningTutor:
"""
Adapts teaching strategy based on learner's responses.
Uses inner loop (student adaptation) and outer loop (strategy refinement).
"""
def adapt(self, student_responses: List[Response]) -> TeachingPolicy:
# Extract learning patterns
mastery_curve = self.estimate_mastery(student_responses)
confusion_points = self.identify_gaps(student_responses)
# Few-shot adaptation: learn from 3-5 interactions
adapted_policy = self.maml_adapt(
base_policy=self.teaching_policy,
support_set=student_responses[-5:], # Last 5 interactions
adaptation_steps=3
)
return adapted_policy
Visualization:
- Learning curve evolution
- Gradient flow diagrams
- Task similarity clustering
- Adaptation trajectory in embedding space
3. Knowledge Graphs & Multi-Hop Reasoning
Show structured knowledge retrieval and reasoning
🕸️ Interactive Knowledge Graph
Papers:
- "Graph Neural Networks: A Review" (Zhou et al., 2020)
- "Knowledge Graphs" (Hogan et al., 2021)
- "REALM: Retrieval-Augmented Language Model Pre-Training" (Guu et al., 2020)
Implementation:
Query: "How does photosynthesis relate to climate change?"
Knowledge Graph Traversal:
[Photosynthesis] ──produces──→ [Oxygen]
↓ ↓
absorbs CO2 breathed by animals
↓ ↓
[Carbon Cycle] ←──affects── [Climate Change]
↓
regulated by
↓
[Deforestation] ──causes──→ [Global Warming]
Multi-Hop Reasoning Path (3 hops):
1. Photosynthesis absorbs CO2 (confidence: 0.99)
2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas (confidence: 0.98)
3. Therefore photosynthesis mitigates climate change (confidence: 0.92)
Features:
- Interactive graph exploration (zoom, filter, highlight)
- GNN reasoning path visualization
- Confidence propagation through graph
- Counterfactual reasoning ("What if we remove this node?")
4. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)
Transparent source attribution and knowledge grounding
📚 RAG Pipeline Visualization
Papers:
- "Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP" (Lewis et al., 2020)
- "Dense Passage Retrieval" (Karpukhin et al., 2020)
- "REPLUG: Retrieval-Augmented Black-Box Language Models" (Shi et al., 2023)
Implementation:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ RAG PIPELINE INSPECTOR │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ [1] Query Encoding │
│ "Explain transformer architecture" │
│ → Embedding: [0.23, -0.45, ...] │
│ │
│ [2] Semantic Search │
│ 🔍 Searching 10M+ passages... │
│ ✓ Top 5 retrieved in 12ms │
│ │
│ [3] Retrieved Context │
│ 📄 "Attention is All You Need" │
│ Relevance: 0.94 | Cited: 87k │
│ 📄 "BERT: Pre-training..." │
│ Relevance: 0.89 | Cited: 52k │
│ [show more...] │
│ │
│ [4] Re-ranking (Cross-Encoder) │
│ Passage 1: 0.94 → 0.97 ⬆ │
│ Passage 2: 0.89 → 0.85 ⬇ │
│ │
│ [5] Generation with Attribution │
│ "Transformers use self-attention │
│ [1] to process sequences..." │
│ │
│ [1] Vaswani et al. 2017, p.3 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
Features:
- Embedding space visualization (t-SNE/UMAP)
- Semantic similarity scores
- Source credibility indicators
- Hallucination detection
5. Uncertainty Quantification & Calibration
Show when the AI is confident vs. uncertain
📊 Confidence Calibration System
Papers:
- "On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks" (Guo et al., 2017)
- "Uncertainty in Deep Learning" (Gal, 2016)
- "Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shift" (Tibshirani et al., 2019)
Implementation:
class UncertaintyQuantifier:
"""
Estimates epistemic (model) and aleatoric (data) uncertainty.
"""
def compute_uncertainty(self, response: str) -> Dict:
return {
"epistemic": self.model_uncertainty(), # What model doesn't know
"aleatoric": self.data_uncertainty(), # Inherent ambiguity
"calibration_score": self.calibration(), # How well-calibrated
"conformal_set": self.conformal_predict() # Prediction interval
}
Visualization:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ UNCERTAINTY DASHBOARD │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Overall Confidence: 76% ±8% │
│ │
│ Epistemic (Model) ██████░░░░ 60% │
│ → Model hasn't seen enough examples │
│ │
│ Aleatoric (Data) █████████░ 85% │
│ → Question has inherent ambiguity │
│ │
│ Calibration Plot: │
│ 1.0 ┤ ╱ │
│ │ ╱ │
│ │ ╱ (perfectly calibrated) │
│ 0.0 └────────────── │
│ │
│ ⚠️ Low confidence detected! │
│ 💡 Suggestion: "Could you clarify...?" │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
6. Constitutional AI & Safety
Demonstrate alignment and safety mechanisms
🛡️ Safety-First Design
Papers:
- "Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback" (Bai et al., 2022)
- "Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback" (Ouyang et al., 2022)
- "Red Teaming Language Models" (Perez et al., 2022)
Implementation:
User Query: "How do I hack into..."
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 🛡️ SAFETY SYSTEM ACTIVATED │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ [1] Harmfulness Detection │
│ ⚠️ Potential harm score: 0.87 │
│ Category: Unauthorized access │
│ │
│ [2] Constitutional Principles │
│ ✓ Principle 1: Do no harm │
│ ✓ Principle 2: Respect privacy │
│ ✓ Principle 3: Follow laws │
│ │
│ [3] Response Correction │
│ Original: [redacted harmful path] │
│ Revised: "I can't help with that, │
│ but I can explain..." │
│ │
│ [4] Educational Redirect │
│ Suggested: "Cybersecurity ethics" │
│ "Penetration testing" │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
Features:
- Real-time safety scoring
- Principle-based reasoning chains
- Adversarial robustness testing
- Red team attack visualization
7. Tree-of-Thoughts Reasoning
Show deliberate problem-solving strategies
🌳 Reasoning Tree Visualization
Papers:
- "Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving" (Yao et al., 2023)
- "Chain-of-Thought Prompting" (Wei et al., 2022)
- "Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought" (Wang et al., 2022)
Implementation:
Problem: "How would you explain relativity to a 10-year-old?"
Tree of Thoughts:
[Root: Strategy Selection]
/ | \
/ | \
[Analogy] [Story] [Demo]
/ | \
[Train] [Ball] [Twin] [Experiment]
/ | | | |
[Fast] [Slow] [Time] [Space] [Show]
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
Eval:0.8 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5
Selected Path (highest score):
Strategy: Analogy → Concept: Train → Example: Slow train
Self-Consistency Check:
✓ Sampled 5 reasoning paths
✓ 4/5 agree on train analogy
✓ Confidence: 94%
Features:
- Interactive tree navigation
- Branch pruning visualization
- Self-evaluation scores at each node
- Comparative reasoning paths
8. Cognitive Load Theory
Optimize learning based on cognitive science
🧠 Cognitive Load Estimation
Papers:
- "Cognitive Load Theory" (Sweller, 1988)
- "Zone of Proximal Development" (Vygotsky)
- "Measuring Cognitive Load Using Dual-Task Methodology" (Brünken et al., 2003)
Implementation:
class CognitiveLoadEstimator:
"""
Estimates intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load.
"""
def estimate_load(self, response_metrics: Dict) -> CognitiveLoad:
return CognitiveLoad(
intrinsic=self.concept_complexity(), # Topic difficulty
extraneous=self.presentation_load(), # UI/format overhead
germane=self.schema_construction(), # Productive learning
# Zone of Proximal Development
zpd_score=self.zpd_alignment(), # Too easy/hard/just right
optimal_challenge=self.compute_optimal_difficulty()
)
Visualization:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ COGNITIVE LOAD MONITOR │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Current Load: 67% (Optimal: 60-80%) │
│ │
│ Intrinsic ████████░░░░ 65% │
│ (concept complexity) │
│ │
│ Extraneous ███░░░░░░░░ 25% │
│ (presentation overhead) │
│ │
│ Germane ████████████ 95% │
│ (productive learning) │
│ │
│ 📍 Zone of Proximal Development │
│ Too Easy ←─[You]─────→ Too Hard │
│ │
│ 💡 Recommendation: Increase difficulty │
│ from Level 3 → Level 4 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
9. Multimodal Learning
Integrate vision, language, code, and more
🎨 Cross-Modal Reasoning
Papers:
- "CLIP: Learning Transferable Visual Models" (Radford et al., 2021)
- "Flamingo: Visual Language Models" (Alayrac et al., 2022)
- "GPT-4 Technical Report" (OpenAI, 2023) - multimodal capabilities
Implementation:
Query: "Explain binary search with a diagram"
Response:
[Text] "Binary search repeatedly divides..."
↓
[Code] def binary_search(arr, target): ...
↓
[Diagram]
[1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15]
↓
[9,11,13,15]
↓
[9,11]
↓
[Animation] Step-by-step execution
↓
[Interactive] Try your own example!
Cross-Modal Attention:
Text ←──0.87──→ Code
Code ←──0.92──→ Diagram
Diagram ←─0.78─→ Animation
Features:
- LaTeX equation rendering
- Mermaid diagram generation
- Code execution sandbox
- Interactive visualizations
10. Direct Preference Optimization (DPO)
Show alignment without reward models
🎯 Preference Learning Visualization
Papers:
- "Direct Preference Optimization" (Rafailov et al., 2023)
- "RLHF: Training language models to follow instructions" (Ouyang et al., 2022)
Implementation:
User Feedback: 👍 or 👎 on responses
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PREFERENCE LEARNING DASHBOARD │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Response A: "Quantum mechanics is..." │
│ Response B: "Let me explain quantum.." │
│ │
│ User Preferred: B (more engaging) │
│ │
│ Policy Update: │
│ Engagement ↑ +15% │
│ Technical detail ↓ -5% │
│ Simplicity ↑ +20% │
│ │
│ Implicit Reward Model: │
│ r(B) - r(A) = +2.3 │
│ │
│ Learning Progress: │
│ Epoch 0 ████████████████░░ 85% │
│ Converged after 142 preferences │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
🏗️ Architecture Overview
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ USER INTERFACE │
│ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ │
│ │ Chat UI │ │ Viz Panel│ │ Controls │ │
│ └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘ │
└───────┼────────────┼────────────┼────────────────────┘
│ │ │
┌───────▼────────────▼────────────▼────────────────────┐
│ COGNITIVE ORCHESTRATOR │
│ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ • Query Understanding │ │
│ │ • Reasoning Strategy Selection │ │
│ │ • Multi-System Coordination │ │
│ └────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└──────────┬──────────────┬──────────────┬────────────┘
│ │ │
┌──────▼───┐ ┌──────▼───┐ ┌────▼──────┐
│ RAG │ │Knowledge │ │Uncertainty│
│ Pipeline │ │ Graph │ │Quantifier │
└──────────┘ └──────────┘ └───────────┘
│ │ │
┌──────▼──────────────▼──────────────▼───────┐
│ LLM with Instrumentation │
│ • Attention tracking │
│ • Activation logging │
│ • Token probability capture │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
🎨 UI/UX Design Principles
Research Lab Aesthetic
- Dark theme with syntax highlighting (like Jupyter/VSCode)
- Monospace fonts for code and data
- Live metrics updating in real-time
- Interactive plots (Plotly/D3.js)
- Collapsible panels for technical details
- Export options (save visualizations, data, configs)
Information Hierarchy
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ [Main Response] ← Primary focus │
│ Clear, readable, large │
│ │
│ [Reasoning Visualization] │
│ ↳ Expandable details │
│ ↳ Interactive elements │
│ │
│ [Technical Metrics] │
│ ↳ Confidence, uncertainty │
│ ↳ Performance stats │
│ │
│ [Research Context] │
│ ↳ Paper references │
│ ↳ Related concepts │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
📊 Data & Metrics to Track
Learning Analytics
- Mastery progression per concept
- Difficulty calibration accuracy
- Engagement metrics (time, interactions)
- Confusion signals (repeated questions, clarifications)
AI Performance Metrics
- Inference latency (p50, p95, p99)
- Token usage per query
- Cache hit rates
- Retrieval precision/recall
- Calibration error (Expected Calibration Error)
- Hallucination rate
A/B Testing Framework
- Reasoning strategies (ToT vs CoT vs ReAct)
- Explanation styles (technical vs analogical)
- Interaction patterns (Socratic vs direct)
🔬 Experimental Features
1. Research Playground
- Compare models side-by-side (GPT-4 vs Claude vs Llama)
- Ablation studies (remove RAG, change prompts)
- Hyperparameter tuning interface
2. Dataset Explorer
- Browse training data examples
- Show nearest neighbors in embedding space
- Visualize data distribution
3. Live Fine-Tuning
- User corrections improve model in real-time
- Show gradient updates
- Track loss curves
📚 Paper References Dashboard
Every feature should link to relevant papers:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 📄 RESEARCH FOUNDATIONS │
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ This feature implements concepts from: │
│ │
│ [1] "Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate │
│ Problem Solving with Large │
│ Language Models" │
│ Yao et al., 2023 │
│ [PDF] [Code] [Cite] │
│ │
│ [2] "Self-Consistency Improves Chain │
│ of Thought Reasoning" │
│ Wang et al., 2022 │
│ [PDF] [Code] [Cite] │
│ │
│ 📊 Implementation Faithfulness: 87% │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
🚀 Implementation Priority
Phase 1: Core Research Infrastructure (Week 1-2)
- ✅ Attention visualization
- ✅ RAG pipeline inspector
- ✅ Uncertainty quantification
- ✅ Paper reference system
Phase 2: Advanced Reasoning (Week 3-4)
- ✅ Tree-of-Thoughts
- ✅ Knowledge graph
- ✅ Meta-learning adaptation
- ✅ Cognitive load estimation
Phase 3: Safety & Alignment (Week 5)
- ✅ Constitutional AI
- ✅ Preference learning (DPO)
- ✅ Hallucination detection
Phase 4: Polish & Deploy (Week 6)
- ✅ Multimodal support
- ✅ Research playground
- ✅ Documentation & demos
🎯 Success Metrics
For Research Positioning
- ✓ Cite 15+ recent papers (2020-2024)
- ✓ Implement 3+ state-of-the-art techniques
- ✓ Provide interactive visualizations for each
- ✓ Show rigorous evaluation metrics
For User Engagement
- ✓ 10+ interactive research features
- ✓ Export-quality visualizations
- ✓ Developer-friendly API
- ✓ Reproducible experiments
💡 Unique Value Proposition
"The only AI tutor that shows its work at the research level"
- See actual attention patterns (not just outputs)
- Understand retrieval and reasoning (not black box)
- Track learning with cognitive science (not just analytics)
- Reference cutting-edge papers (academic credibility)
- Experiment with AI techniques (interactive research)
This positions you as a research lab that:
- Understands the latest AI/ML advances
- Implements them rigorously
- Makes them accessible and educational
- Contributes to interpretability research
Next Steps: Pick 2-3 features from Phase 1 to prototype first?