ACE-TA: An Agentic Teaching Assistant for Grounded Q&A, Quiz Generation, and Code Tutoring

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at code generation but remain heavily reliant on large-scale annotated solutions and verification-based supervision, which constrains scalability and hinders sustained self-improvement. Recent solver--verifier frameworks exploit program execution as an automatic supervision signal, but their effectiveness degrades as solvers become moderately strong: verifier-generated tests increasingly confirm semantic correctness rather than exposing the remaining failure modes. We propose ACE, a self-evolving code generation framework based on a solver--adversary architecture that prioritizes active failure discovery through execution-centric supervision. A single LLM alternates between generating candidate programs and producing adversarial unit test inputs optimized to induce execution-level failures, such as runtime errors, exceptions, or non-termination. Supervision is derived solely from execution outcomes: robust programs are selected for supervised fine-tuning, while adversarial tests are optimized via Kahneman--Tversky Optimization using execution-derived preferences. Notably, the entire training loop requires no ground-truth code or external reward models. Experiments on CodeContests, MBPP, and LiveCodeBench demonstrate that ACE consistently outperforms strong solver--verifier baselines, achieving 3--7% absolute gains in pass@1, with larger improvements on out-of-distribution benchmarks, while maintaining competitive or improved inference efficiency.

Artificial students -- models that simulate how learners act and respond within educational systems -- are a promising tool for evaluating tutoring strategies and feedback mechanisms at scale. However, most existing approaches rely on prompting large, proprietary language models, limiting adaptability to specific courses and raising concerns around privacy, cost, and dependence. In this work, we propose a framework for training open-weight artificial programming learners directly from authentic student process data. Our approach serializes temporal log traces into a conversational format, representing each student's problem-solving process as a dialogue between the learner and their automated assessment system. Student code submissions and environment feedback, such as test outcomes, grades, and error traces, form alternating conversational turns, enabling models to learn from the iterative debugging process. We additionally introduce a training pipeline combining supervised fine-tuning with preference optimization to align models with authentic student debugging behavior. We evaluate our framework by training Qwen models at 4B and 8B scales on a large-scale dataset of real student submissions to Python programming assignments. Our results show that incorporating environment feedback strengthens models' ability to replicate student debugging behavior, improving over both prior code-only approaches and prompted large language models baselines in functional alignment and code similarity. We release our code to support reproducibility.

We present CODE-GEN, a human-in-the-Loop, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-based agentic AI system for generating context-aligned multiple-choice questions to develop student code reasoning and comprehension abilities. CODE-GEN employs an agentic AI architecture in which a Generator agent produces multiple-choice coding comprehension questions aligned with course-specific learning objectives, while a Validator agent independently assesses content quality across seven pedagogical dimensions. Both agents are augmented with specialized tools that enhance computational accuracy and verify code outputs. To evaluate the effectiveness of CODE-GEN, we conducted an evaluation study involving six human subject-matter experts (SMEs) who judged 288 AI-generated questions. The SMEs produced a total of 2,016 human-AI rating pairs, indicating agreement or disagreement with the assessments of Validator, along with 131 instances of qualitative feedback. Analyses of SME judgments show strong system performance, with human-validated success rates ranging from 79.9% to 98.6% across the seven pedagogical dimensions. The analysis of qualitative feedback reveals that CODE-GEN achieves high reliability on dimensions well suited to computational verification and explicit criteria matching, including question clarity, code validity, concept alignment, and correct answer validity. In contrast, human expertise remains essential for dimensions requiring deeper instructional judgment, such as designing pedagogically meaningful distractors and providing high-quality feedback that reinforces understanding. These findings inform the strategic allocation of human and AI effort in AI-assisted educational content generation.