Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Personalized instrumental-practice planning requires selecting and ordering exercises, allocating duration and difficulty, and accounting for prerequisites, fatigue, spacing, and forgetting across multiple sessions. This paper presents RECAP-RL, a symmetry-guided reinforcement-learning framework that post-trains a structured large language model (LLM) policy to generate budget-feasible, teacher-editable practice plans optimized for delayed retention. Symmetry enters at two levels. At the objective level, retention-anchored dense analytic reward shaping (RADAR) re-expresses terminal retention-adjusted learning gain (RALG) as telescoping differences in a retention potential based on the learner’s projected retained mastery; this re-expression preserves core-objective policy ordering and yields an action-independent retention-state baseline whose variance effect is characterized analytically. At the intervention level, matched-intervention replay with residualized order-graph rewards (MIRROR) pairs each exercise with an equal-duration null-practice twin under a common continuation; exchanging the twins reverses the signed retained and prerequisite-unlock contrast, and zero-mean residualization preserves the mean exercise-block advantage when credit is assigned to exercise-token blocks. We instantiate the framework for piano practice in a mechanistic environment with 72 skills and 520 exercises. Against eleven comparison planners on held-out and structurally shifted learner families, RECAP-RL reaches a RALG of 0.399±0.004, exceeding the strongest observable-state model-based planner by 0.034 and terminal-reward group-relative policy optimization by 0.027, while reducing mean cross-family degradation from 26.6% to 18.8% and improving prerequisite repair and spacing alignment. These simulation results support symmetry-guided reward and credit design for delayed educational planning; longitudinal human studies remain necessary to establish educational effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: