Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
10.55041/IJSREM.NCET012
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-6
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Computer Science & Engineering
Syed Ammal Arts and Science College
Traditional study planning tools function as static schedulers that neither adapt to a learner's progress nor explain their recommendations. This paper presents GoalForge AI, an agentic study-planning system built on a seven-agent orchestration architecture — Planner, Research, Decision, Execution, Validation, Memory, and Reporting — where each agent handles one stage of the planning lifecycle and every stage is logged for full traceability. The system is implemented using Node.js, React, SQLite, and the Gemini API. A deterministic, rulebased Decision agent selects a pacing strategy from milestone density, keeping this critical step explainable and independent of external API availability. Functional and integration testing confirm the seven-agent pipeline executes correctly end-to-end, the Decision agent responds correctly to changing density, and the system degrades gracefully via fallback when the AI service is unavailable. Results demonstrate that decomposing agentic planning into specialized, auditable agents is a practical approach to explainable AI in personalized education.
KEYWORDS
This paper presented GoalForge AI, a seven-agent orchestration framework that reframes study planning as a coordinated pipeline of specialized, individually auditable agents rather than a single opaque model call. By combining LLM-driven agents for goal decomposition, research, and reporting with a deterministic, rule-based Decision agent, the system achieves a balance between adaptability and explainability that is difficult to obtain from a single end-toend model. The working implementation, spanning a Node.js and Express backend, an SQLite persistence layer, and a React frontend, demonstrates the technical feasibility of this architecture, and the persistent audit log provides a concrete mechanism for inspecting an agentic system's reasoning — a property of growing importance as such systems are adopted in education and other human-centered domains. More broadly, the design pattern demonstrated here — pairing LLM-driven agents for open-ended reasoning tasks with deterministic, rule-based agents for safety- or trustcritical decisions — is not specific to study planning and may generalize to other agentic applications where explainability and predictable behavior are as important as adaptability. Future work will focus on four directions: empirical evaluation with real learners over a full academic term to measure plan adherence against a static-timetable baseline; an automatic replanning trigger so the Validation agent can invoke the Planner and Decision agents again when a learner falls significantly behind, rather than requiring manual goal recreation; richer memory modeling capable of capturing individual learning styles and historically effective task densities rather than a single last-used strategy; and migration of the persistence layer to a networked database engine to support concurrent, multi-institution deployment at scale.
[1]S. Russell and P. Norvig, "Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach," 4th ed., Pearson, 2021. [2]T. Brown et al., "Language Models are Few-Shot Learners," in Proc. NeurIPS, 2020. [3]Google AI, "Gemini API Documentation," Google DeepMind, 2025. [4]OpenJS Foundation, "Node.js SQLite Built-in Module Documentation," Node.js Docs, 2025. [5] React Core Team, "React Documentation," Meta Open Source, 2025. [6]M. Wooldridge, "An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems," 2nd ed., Wiley, 2009. [7] IEEE Computer Society, "IEEE Standard for Software and System Test Documentation," IEEE Std 829-2008, 2008. [8] OWASP Foundation, "OWASP Authentication Cheat Sheet," OWASP Foundation, 2024.
Publication Date
10/5/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
0
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...