[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-8461
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Intraverbal + Listener Responding + Mand + Reading
Date range: Sessions 1–12 across 24 days (2026-06-24 to 2026-07-18)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. selects items by feature (Listener Responding)
   Method: DTT
2. follows 1-step motor instructions (Listener Responding)
   Method: DTT
3. single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad") (Mand)
   Method: NET
4. answers WH-questions about familiar topics (Intraverbal)
   Method: NET
5. sounds out CVC words (Reading)
   Method: DTT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Mouthing — function hypothesized: automatic

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-06-24 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 6/14 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×3, I×3
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 5/15 correct (36%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×4, I×7
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 7/15 correct (45%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 4/11 correct (37%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 3/12 correct (26%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×8
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 16%

Session 2 — 2026-06-26 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 6/14 correct (45%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×3, I×3
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 5/12 correct (43%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×4, I×2
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 5/8 correct (57%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 6/14 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×9
  sounds out CVC words: 5/14 correct (38%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×9
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 21%

Session 3 — 2026-06-28 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 7/11 correct (60%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 4/9 correct (46%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×1
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 8/14 correct (60%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×12
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 6/14 correct (46%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×12
  sounds out CVC words: 6/14 correct (43%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×1, I×9
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 19%

Session 4 — 2026-06-30 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 8/14 correct (59%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×3, I×7
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 8/14 correct (55%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×0, I×10
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 7/11 correct (63%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×3
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  sounds out CVC words: 4/10 correct (38%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 12%

Session 5 — 2026-07-02 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 6/8 correct (73%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 7/12 correct (58%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×9
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 9/12 correct (72%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×2, I×2
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 9/15 correct (60%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×5, I×2
  sounds out CVC words: 4/9 correct (46%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×2, I×2
  Mouthing: freq 2; PIR 9%

Session 6 — 2026-07-04 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 7/10 correct (73%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 8/11 correct (68%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×7
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 9/11 correct (81%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 9/14 correct (64%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 4/8 correct (47%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 18%

Session 7 — 2026-07-06 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 10/12 correct (83%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×4, I×5
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 6/9 correct (72%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 7/9 correct (83%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×1
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 9/13 correct (65%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×1, I×7
  sounds out CVC words: 7/13 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×4
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 21%

Session 8 — 2026-07-08 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 9/10 correct (93%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×7
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 10/13 correct (77%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 9/10 correct (92%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×5
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 10/15 correct (69%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 7/13 correct (57%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×1, I×7
  Mouthing: freq 4; PIR 21%

Session 9 — 2026-07-10 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 11/12 correct (95%); latency 1.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 8/10 correct (80%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 10/11 correct (95%); latency 1.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 10/14 correct (75%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 5/8 correct (66%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  Mouthing: freq 4; PIR 21%

Session 10 — 2026-07-12 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 14/15 correct (95%); latency 1.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×5, I×8
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 12/13 correct (90%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×0, I×7
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 13/14 correct (95%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 11/13 correct (83%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×10
  sounds out CVC words: 7/11 correct (64%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 13%

Session 11 — 2026-07-14 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 9/9 correct (95%); latency 1.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 9/9 correct (95%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 14/15 correct (95%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×5, PP×5, G×0, I×5
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 13/14 correct (95%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×12
  sounds out CVC words: 11/15 correct (71%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×11
  Mouthing: freq 4; PIR 18%

Session 12 — 2026-07-16 — 41 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 14/15 correct (95%); latency 1.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×9
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 10/10 correct (95%); latency 1.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 8/8 correct (95%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 10/11 correct (95%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 11/15 correct (76%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×5, I×8
  Mouthing: freq 3; PIR 23%

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Eye contact maintained throughout trials
- Quick response latency (within 2–3 seconds)

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- Steady improvement: accuracy rose from 41% to 95% across 12 sessions.
- No clinical concerns at this time; mastery criteria should be reachable within a few additional sessions.

## Pattern Classification
mastery_progression

Accuracy is ascending cleanly across sessions with no interfering behaviors, consistent with a mastery-progression trajectory.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Mouthing: automatic
  Evidence: behavior persists across contexts without clear social mediation.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Continue current teaching procedure — it is effective for this learner.
- Maintain current stimulus arrangement; begin planning next skill in sequence.

### Consequence strategies
- Begin thinning reinforcement from CRF to FR-2 as accuracy stabilizes above 85%.
- Continue differential reinforcement for independent responses.

## Escalation Level
1 — Continue monitoring

Current programming is effective; no change needed.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 12 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 12 sessions: 75.6%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 41%, last session: 95%).
- Mouthing: mean 3.2/session (early-window mean 3.0 -> late-window mean 3.5).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: tacts common objects (ball, cup, shoe)
Curriculum: Tact L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Developing

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: tacts common objects (ball, cup, shoe)
- Curriculum: Tact L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What is this?"
Variations: "Tell me what you see"; "What's that?"; "Name this"
Presentation: Present the target stimulus within visual field and ask while pointing to it.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Most-to-Least (errorless)
Sequence: full physical -> partial physical -> gestural -> positional -> independent
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, begin at higher prompt levels (full-physical or partial-physical) with systematic fading.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: book, spoon, towel
Distractor stimuli: hat, apple
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Model correct response -> lead (do together) -> test (independent) -> distractor -> retest.

## Reinforcement Schedule
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
90% first-trial-correct across 5 consecutive sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a Task Analysis program for this multi-step skill.

Target: putting on pants
Curriculum: AFLS Basic Living Skills
Learner: Adolescent Learner
Mastery Status: Developing

Please include the task analysis (numbered steps), chain type, prompt strategy per step, error correction, reinforcement, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: putting on pants
- Curriculum: AFLS Basic Living Skills
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This Task Analysis program teaches the target skill as a chain of discrete steps, each taught and reinforced until the learner can complete the full sequence independently.

## Task Analysis
Chain type: Backward chaining
Complete all steps for the learner except the last; teach the last step first, then work backward. The final reinforcer (task completion) is always present for the learner.

Steps:
1. Sit or stand securely.
2. Hold pants with the front facing away.
3. Place one leg into the corresponding pant leg.
4. Place the other leg into the other pant leg.
5. Pull pants up to the waist.
6. Fasten the button / zipper / velcro.  <- Learner-taught step (backward chaining starts here)

## Prompt Strategy Per Step
Strategy: Most-to-Least
Start with full-physical prompt at each step; fade to partial physical, gestural, verbal, independent.
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, use full-physical or partial-physical prompts at each step; fade systematically.

## Error Correction Procedure
Back-step + re-approach: Return to the previously-mastered step; re-execute that step correctly; then re-attempt the missed step with one prompt level above the last independent level

## Reinforcement
CRF per step (acquisition) — Continuous reinforcement for each correctly-completed step during acquisition.
Pair the terminal reinforcer with the natural consequence of the completed task (e.g., clean hands, clean dishes, completed routine).

## Mastery Criteria
Chain self-initiated from the appropriate antecedent (no verbal prompt to begin) across 3 consecutive opportunities.

## Data Collection
Per-step data: each step is scored for independence / prompt level on every trial. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full chain across 3 different settings and with 3 different adults. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Interpret the following behavioral session log. Provide clinical concerns, pattern classification, behavior function hypothesis (if applicable), programming recommendations (antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis), escalation level, confidence, and data-supported rationale.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-9529
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Independent Living + Mand + Tolerating Denied Access + Vocational
Date range: Sessions 1–8 across 16 days (2026-05-16 to 2026-06-01)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. scheduling medical appointments (Independent Living)
   Method: Task Analysis
2. wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
3. self-advocacy statements (Independent Living)
   Method: BST
4. requesting assistance using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
5. completing assigned tasks in order (Vocational)
   Method: Task Analysis

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Pica — function hypothesized: automatic

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-05-16 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 11/14 correct (76%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×3, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (63%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  self-advocacy statements: 6/11 correct (59%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 7/13 correct (51%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×12
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  Pica: attempts 1 (1 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

Session 2 — 2026-05-18 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 11/15 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×3, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 5/9 correct (59%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  self-advocacy statements: 6/10 correct (56%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 8/14 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×3
  completing assigned tasks in order: 6/10 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  Pica: attempts 1 (1 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

Session 3 — 2026-05-20 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 9/12 correct (73%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×4, I×3
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 5/8 correct (57%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  self-advocacy statements: 9/15 correct (62%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×4, I×4
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/10 correct (53%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  completing assigned tasks in order: 6/10 correct (62%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  Pica: attempts 2 (0 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 2 successful — item ingested)

Session 4 — 2026-05-22 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/10 correct (43%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 4/15 correct (28%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×0, I×10
  self-advocacy statements: 3/9 correct (36%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×6
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 3/11 correct (28%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×7
  completing assigned tasks in order: 5/14 correct (37%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×12
  Pica: attempts 5 (5 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

Session 5 — 2026-05-24 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 5/10 correct (45%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 4/15 correct (29%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×1, I×9
  self-advocacy statements: 5/13 correct (40%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×10
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 3/8 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  completing assigned tasks in order: 7/14 correct (47%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×3, I×6
  Pica: attempts 4 (3 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 1 successful — item ingested)

Session 6 — 2026-05-26 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 7/14 correct (48%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×13
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 3/8 correct (33%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  self-advocacy statements: 4/8 correct (48%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/12 correct (35%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×8
  completing assigned tasks in order: 8/15 correct (54%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×12
  Pica: attempts 1 (1 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

Session 7 — 2026-05-28 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/8 correct (53%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 5/12 correct (38%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×4, I×3
  self-advocacy statements: 7/13 correct (51%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×7
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/12 correct (39%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×0, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 5/8 correct (57%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  Pica: attempts 1 (1 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

Session 8 — 2026-05-30 — 40 min — 1 observer
  scheduling medical appointments: 8/15 correct (54%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×11
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×8
  self-advocacy statements: 5/9 correct (57%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×7
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/11 correct (41%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 6/10 correct (57%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×2, I×4
  Pica: attempts 2 (2 unsuccessful — staff retrieved item before ingestion; 0 successful — item ingested)

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Echolalic responding (repeating SD rather than answering)
- Playing with non-task materials
- Leaving seat without permission
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Setting event pattern**: observable change in performance correlated with an external event (illness, sleep, schedule).
- Correlation between setting event and performance should be tracked explicitly.

## Pattern Classification
setting_event_trigger

A discontinuous performance change at a specific session correlates with an external setting event.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Pica: automatic
  Evidence: behavior persists across contexts without clear social mediation.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Identify and document the setting event (sleep, illness, schedule change, medication).
- Modify programming demand on days when setting event is present.
- Coordinate with caregivers / medical team on setting-event factors outside the program.

### Consequence strategies
- Track setting events alongside performance data to quantify their effect.

### Crisis plan
- If the setting event involves a medical concern (seizure-like activity, injury, illness): stop the program immediately, follow the facility's medical-incident protocol, and refer to the appropriate medical professional. Medical events are NOT behavioral targets and must not be treated as ABA programming issues.
- If behavior escalates during the setting-event window: use verbal de-escalation and environmental safety first; do not add demand. Only staff currently certified in the facility's crisis-prevention framework may use physical intervention, and only if imminent safety risk warrants it AND the learner's BIP specifically authorizes it (contraindications and BIP restrictions may rule it out).
- Coordinate with caregivers, the medical team, and the supervising BCBA; document the setting event and the associated behavior for pattern analysis. Review the BIP in light of the setting-event data.

## Escalation Level
3 — Supervisor review

Combination of performance decline and/or behavior data warrants supervising BCBA review within 24–48 hours.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 8 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 8 sessions: 58.3%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 76%, last session: 54%).
- Pica: mean 2.1/session (early-window mean 1.0 -> late-window mean 1.5).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a chaining program for the following.

Skill: clocking in at start of shift
Curriculum: AFLS Vocational Skills
Learner Level: Adult Learner
Baseline: Developing

Include the full Task Analysis structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: clocking in at start of shift
- Curriculum: AFLS Vocational Skills
- Learner: Adult Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This Task Analysis program teaches the target skill as a chain of discrete steps, each taught and reinforced until the learner can complete the full sequence independently.

## Task Analysis
Chain type: Total-task presentation
Prompt the learner through the entire chain every trial; fade prompts across all steps simultaneously.

Steps:
1. Arrive at the workplace by the scheduled time.
2. Locate the time clock or digital system.
3. Enter identification (ID card / badge / code).
4. Confirm the clock-in timestamp.
5. Notify the supervisor or check the day's task list.
6. Proceed to the assigned workstation.

## Prompt Strategy Per Step
Strategy: Graduated Guidance
Hand-over-hand physical guidance with fading pressure; move to shadow, then independent.
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, provide hand-over-hand guidance at each step; reduce physical pressure across sessions.

## Error Correction Procedure
Task reset: Pause the chain; reset environmental stimuli; restart the chain from the beginning with full prompts at the previously-missed step

## Reinforcement
CRF per step (acquisition) — Continuous reinforcement for each correctly-completed step during acquisition.
Pair the terminal reinforcer with the natural consequence of the completed task (e.g., clean hands, clean dishes, completed routine).

## Mastery Criteria
Full chain completed within 60s across 3 consecutive sessions with independent responding on all steps.

## Data Collection
Per-step data: each step is scored for independence / prompt level on every trial. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full chain across 2 different settings and with 3 different adults. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
Curriculum: Reading L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Mastered at current level

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
- Curriculum: Reading L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What letter is this?"
Variations: "Read this letter"; "What does this say?"
Presentation: Present the letter flashcard.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Stimulus Shaping
Sequence: modified stimulus -> intermediate shape -> target stimulus
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: B, F, I
Distractor stimuli: J, D
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
"No, watch me" -> model -> re-present SD -> differential reinforcement for correct response.

## Reinforcement Schedule
VR-3 (variable ratio 3) — Average of every 3rd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Fluency criterion: correct responses within 3-second latency at 90% accuracy.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 2 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-3969
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Mand + Motor Imitation + Tact + Tolerating Denied Access
Date range: Sessions 1–11 across 22 days (2026-03-08 to 2026-03-30)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad") (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. imitates 3-step motor sequences (Motor Imitation)
   Method: DTT variant
3. wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
4. requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break') (Mand)
   Method: NET
5. tacts colors of objects (Tact)
   Method: DTT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Elopement — function hypothesized: automatic

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-03-08 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/15 correct (40%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×5, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 4/9 correct (50%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 7/15 correct (45%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×0, I×11
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 8/15 correct (53%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×0, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 6/12 correct (49%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 2 — 2026-03-10 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/12 correct (52%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×2, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 4/10 correct (39%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 9/14 correct (63%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 5/12 correct (42%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 10/12 correct (84%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×6
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 3 — 2026-03-12 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/12 correct (46%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 8/13 correct (62%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/9 correct (56%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×3
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 4/11 correct (33%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 7/9 correct (75%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  Elopement: freq 4

Session 4 — 2026-03-14 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 3/8 correct (33%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 4/8 correct (51%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/10 correct (63%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×7
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 3/8 correct (40%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  tacts colors of objects: 10/14 correct (74%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×1, I×7
  Elopement: freq 7

Session 5 — 2026-03-16 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 5/10 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 4/15 correct (24%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×11
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/14 correct (37%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×2, I×8
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 7/13 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 5/10 correct (50%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 6 — 2026-03-18 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 5/10 correct (49%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 6/15 correct (39%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×0, I×9
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 8/15 correct (52%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×5, G×0, I×9
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 5/10 correct (55%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×4
  tacts colors of objects: 9/11 correct (82%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 7 — 2026-03-20 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 8/15 correct (56%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 5/8 correct (61%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/9 correct (55%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 8/14 correct (58%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×1, I×7
  tacts colors of objects: 7/8 correct (82%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 8 — 2026-03-22 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 5/9 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 5/12 correct (43%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 3/9 correct (35%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 4/13 correct (31%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  tacts colors of objects: 7/11 correct (63%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  Elopement: freq 7

Session 9 — 2026-03-24 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 7/11 correct (63%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 5/8 correct (61%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 4/14 correct (28%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×2, I×7
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 5/10 correct (47%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  tacts colors of objects: 12/14 correct (84%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×4, I×7
  Elopement: freq 7

Session 10 — 2026-03-26 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/11 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 5/11 correct (44%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/11 correct (43%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 4/9 correct (41%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×2
  tacts colors of objects: 9/12 correct (74%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×1
  Elopement: freq 7

Session 11 — 2026-03-28 — 37 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/9 correct (64%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 6/10 correct (59%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 8/13 correct (60%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  requesting a break ('break please' or AAC 'I need a break'): 4/15 correct (26%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×11
  tacts colors of objects: 6/12 correct (50%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×8
  Elopement: freq 6

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals
- Playing with non-task materials
- Leaving seat without permission

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Variable performance**: accuracy fluctuating around 52% with no clear trend.
- Inconsistency may indicate stimulus-control issues or motivational variability across sessions.

## Pattern Classification
variable_performance

High session-to-session variability with no clear trend suggests environmental or motivational inconsistency rather than a single programmatic issue.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Elopement: automatic
  Evidence: behavior persists across contexts without clear social mediation.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Check for environmental variables that differ across sessions (time of day, therapist, setting).
- Standardize session structure and reinforcement delivery across therapists.

### Consequence strategies
- Implement inter-observer agreement probes to rule out measurement inconsistency.

## Escalation Level
3 — Supervisor review

Combination of performance decline and/or behavior data warrants supervising BCBA review within 24–48 hours.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 11 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 11 sessions: 51.9%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 40%, last session: 64%).
- Elopement: mean 4.6/session (early-window mean 3.0 -> late-window mean 6.7).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Here is a multi-session behavioral log for a learner. Analyze it and provide your clinical interpretation using the structured format.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-3823
Profile: School-Age Learner (6–12 years)
Curricula: Mand
Date range: Sessions 1–10 across 20 days (2026-10-26 to 2026-11-15)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. 2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please") (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please") (Mand)
   Method: NET
3. single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad") (Mand)
   Method: NET

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-10-26 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 8/10 correct (82%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 11/12 correct (89%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 8/9 correct (91%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×3

Session 2 — 2026-10-28 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 3/13 correct (24%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 4/9 correct (41%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 2/9 correct (22%); latency 5.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×1

Session 3 — 2026-10-30 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 9/11 correct (83%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×3
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 13/15 correct (89%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×5, I×2
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 14/15 correct (92%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×5, G×0, I×9

Session 4 — 2026-11-01 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 4/14 correct (31%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×11
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 6/14 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×1, I×6
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 3/11 correct (28%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×6

Session 5 — 2026-11-03 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 8/10 correct (84%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×7
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 9/10 correct (92%); latency 1.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 11/12 correct (89%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×5

Session 6 — 2026-11-05 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 3/15 correct (23%); latency 5.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×9
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 3/8 correct (36%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 3/13 correct (27%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×4, I×7

Session 7 — 2026-11-07 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 9/11 correct (80%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×7
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 10/12 correct (87%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 12/13 correct (92%); latency 1.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×4, I×3

Session 8 — 2026-11-09 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 2/8 correct (26%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 6/15 correct (38%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×1, I×6
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 3/13 correct (21%); latency 5.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×6

Session 9 — 2026-11-11 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 7/8 correct (83%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 12/13 correct (92%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×4, I×3
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 13/14 correct (91%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×12

Session 10 — 2026-11-13 — 47 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 2/8 correct (30%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 4/10 correct (38%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×6
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 2/11 correct (21%); latency 5.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×7

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)
- Echolalic responding (repeating SD rather than answering)
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals
- Leaving seat without permission

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Generalization failure**: strong performance in training context but failure to generalize to novel conditions.
- Skill may be under restricted stimulus control.

## Pattern Classification
generalization_failure

Alternation between strong training performance and poor novel-condition performance indicates restricted stimulus control.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Implement structured generalization training: vary therapists, settings, and materials systematically.
- Use multiple-exemplar training — teach with 3–5 different stimulus sets.
- Program common stimuli across training and generalization settings.

### Consequence strategies
- Consider natural-environment training (NET) to supplement DTT for this skill.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 10 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 10 sessions: 54.6%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 82%, last session: 30%).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: selects correct item from array of 4–6
Curriculum Reference: Listener Responding L2
Learner Profile: School-Age Learner
Current Mastery: Generalization phase
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: selects correct item from array of 4–6
- Curriculum: Listener Responding L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Generalization phase

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "Touch [target item]"
Variations: "Point to [target item]"; "Give me [target item]"; "Show me [target item]"
Presentation: Present an array of items on the table and deliver a clear verbal SD.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Stimulus Shaping
Sequence: modified stimulus -> intermediate shape -> target stimulus
Current prompt level: At the generalization stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: sock, apple, cup
Distractor stimuli: towel, phone, glue, bottle
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Re-present SD -> provide effective-level prompt -> reinforce prompted response -> distractor trial -> re-present SD independently.

## Reinforcement Schedule
Token economy — Tokens delivered per correct response; exchanged at session end for a back-up reinforcer appropriate to the learner (for children: candy, cookies, brief leisure-time access, preferred activity, screen time, or a favorite sensory item). Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy at independent prompt level across 3 sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a Discrete Trial Training program for the following.

Skill: traces letters of own name
Curriculum: Writing L1
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Emerging

Include the full DTT trial structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: traces letters of own name
- Curriculum: Writing L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "Write the target."
Variations: "Trace this"; "Copy this"; "Write {word}"
Presentation: Provide pencil and paper; deliver a clear verbal instruction naming the target letter or word.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, begin at higher prompt levels (full-physical or partial-physical) with systematic fading.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: H, U, C
Distractor stimuli: V, T
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Re-present SD -> provide effective-level prompt -> reinforce prompted response -> distractor trial -> re-present SD independently.

## Reinforcement Schedule
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy with 2 different therapists and 2 different settings.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 2 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-7482
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Community + Mand + Self-Care + Tolerating Denied Access
Date range: Sessions 1–11 across 22 days (2026-03-14 to 2026-04-05)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
2. using public transportation (Community)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. requesting assistance using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
4. dressing (pants, shirt) (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Aggression — function hypothesized: attention

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-03-14 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/14 correct (56%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×11
  using public transportation: 11/14 correct (76%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×7
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/12 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×3, I×2
  Aggression: freq 7

Session 2 — 2026-03-16 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 7/9 correct (78%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  using public transportation: 7/15 correct (46%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×0, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 8/13 correct (64%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/13 correct (29%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×4, I×7
  Aggression: freq 5

Session 3 — 2026-03-18 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/8 correct (80%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  using public transportation: 10/14 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×12
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 6/10 correct (56%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/9 correct (40%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  Aggression: freq 7

Session 4 — 2026-03-20 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 11/15 correct (72%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×5, I×5
  using public transportation: 5/8 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 9/15 correct (57%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/12 correct (30%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  Aggression: freq 6

Session 5 — 2026-03-22 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 7/15 correct (48%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×11
  using public transportation: 4/8 correct (52%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/10 correct (47%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/9 correct (59%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×2
  Aggression: freq 7

Session 6 — 2026-03-24 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 5/8 correct (66%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  using public transportation: 6/13 correct (48%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×9
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 8/12 correct (70%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×4
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/14 correct (31%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×0, I×6
  Aggression: freq 2

Session 7 — 2026-03-26 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 10/15 correct (68%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  using public transportation: 9/12 correct (73%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×9
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 9/13 correct (67%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×9
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/12 correct (48%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×4, I×2
  Aggression: freq 8

Session 8 — 2026-03-28 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/10 correct (63%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  using public transportation: 10/13 correct (77%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 7/13 correct (56%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/11 correct (45%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×7
  Aggression: freq 4

Session 9 — 2026-03-30 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 5/9 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  using public transportation: 7/9 correct (76%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×3
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 10/14 correct (68%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/11 correct (41%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  Aggression: freq 7

Session 10 — 2026-04-01 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 13/15 correct (84%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×5, I×2
  using public transportation: 5/11 correct (49%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×10
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/9 correct (56%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/10 correct (61%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  Aggression: freq 6

Session 11 — 2026-04-03 — 53 min — 1 observer
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 7/8 correct (82%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  using public transportation: 8/12 correct (65%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×4, I×5
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/11 correct (49%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/14 correct (31%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×11
  Aggression: freq 5

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Playing with non-task materials
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Variable performance**: accuracy fluctuating around 69% with no clear trend.
- Inconsistency may indicate stimulus-control issues or motivational variability across sessions.

## Pattern Classification
variable_performance

High session-to-session variability with no clear trend suggests environmental or motivational inconsistency rather than a single programmatic issue.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Aggression: attention
  Evidence: behavior occurs during low-attention periods and results in social attention contingently.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Check for environmental variables that differ across sessions (time of day, therapist, setting).
- Standardize session structure and reinforcement delivery across therapists.

### Consequence strategies
- Implement inter-observer agreement probes to rule out measurement inconsistency.

## Escalation Level
3 — Supervisor review

Combination of performance decline and/or behavior data warrants supervising BCBA review within 24–48 hours.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 11 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 11 sessions: 68.1%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 56%, last session: 82%).
- Aggression: mean 5.8/session (early-window mean 6.3 -> late-window mean 6.0).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a Natural Environment Teaching program for the following.

Skill: names items in categories when given the category
Curriculum: Intraverbal L2
Learner Level: School-Age Learner
Baseline: Emerging

Include the full naturalistic teaching structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: names items in categories when given the category
- Curriculum: Intraverbal L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Engage the learner in a naturalistic conversation on a topic of demonstrated interest. Pause at natural turn boundaries to invite the target response.
Primary natural context: leisure chat.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's leisure chat routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Expectant look (pause)
Deliver no prompt — maintain eye contact and hold the preferred item until the learner responds.
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, begin with a model prompt delivered during the motivated moment; fade to expectant look across sessions.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: conversation continues with adult's naturally matched reply.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 5 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use across 3 different adults and 2 different settings within 2 weeks.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.

names items in categories when given the category


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Here is a multi-session behavioral log for a learner. Analyze it and provide your clinical interpretation using the structured format.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-2536
Profile: School-Age Learner (6–12 years)
Curricula: Mand + Reading + Tolerating Denied Access
Date range: Sessions 1–12 across 24 days (2026-02-15 to 2026-03-11)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad") (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. sounds out CVC words (Reading)
   Method: DTT
3. wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
4. indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete (Mand)
   Method: NET
5. requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please") (Mand)
   Method: NET
6. mands for missing items needed to complete an activity (Mand)
   Method: NET

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Elopement — function hypothesized: escape

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-02-15 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 8/11 correct (75%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×6
  sounds out CVC words: 11/15 correct (75%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×3, I×9
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 8/10 correct (76%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 9/12 correct (76%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×10
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 7/9 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 13/15 correct (86%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×5, I×10
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 2 — 2026-02-17 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 11/14 correct (78%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×7
  sounds out CVC words: 10/13 correct (78%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/8 correct (72%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×0, I×5
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 7/10 correct (72%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 8/11 correct (72%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×6
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 12/15 correct (79%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×9
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 3 — 2026-02-19 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 11/15 correct (74%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×10
  sounds out CVC words: 9/13 correct (70%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/9 correct (64%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 7/10 correct (69%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 9/15 correct (60%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×0, I×8
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 9/12 correct (75%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 4 — 2026-02-21 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 7/11 correct (63%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×7
  sounds out CVC words: 9/14 correct (62%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×9
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 7/12 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×4, I×4
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 7/11 correct (64%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 5/9 correct (57%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 9/14 correct (67%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×10
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 5 — 2026-02-23 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 4/8 correct (55%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×5
  sounds out CVC words: 8/15 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×12
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/10 correct (51%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 6/9 correct (62%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 5/9 correct (54%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 9/15 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×4, I×7
  Elopement: freq 4

Session 6 — 2026-02-25 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 5/10 correct (51%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  sounds out CVC words: 4/9 correct (45%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 7/15 correct (44%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×5, I×5
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 6/11 correct (50%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 7/13 correct (50%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×10
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 9/15 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×5, PP×5, G×4, I×1
  Elopement: freq 4

Session 7 — 2026-02-27 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/13 correct (46%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  sounds out CVC words: 6/13 correct (45%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×0, I×9
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 4/13 correct (32%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 4/10 correct (42%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 6/14 correct (45%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×1, I×7
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 8/15 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×0, I×7
  Elopement: freq 5

Session 8 — 2026-03-01 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/14 correct (41%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  sounds out CVC words: 3/9 correct (38%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 3/14 correct (21%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 4/11 correct (39%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 3/10 correct (34%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 3/8 correct (43%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  Elopement: freq 4

Session 9 — 2026-03-03 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 6/15 correct (42%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×0, I×10
  sounds out CVC words: 2/8 correct (26%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 2/11 correct (18%); latency 5.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×7
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 4/10 correct (40%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×6
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 4/11 correct (32%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 4/10 correct (40%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  Elopement: freq 5

Session 10 — 2026-03-05 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 4/12 correct (33%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  sounds out CVC words: 2/11 correct (19%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 1/13 correct (10%); latency 5.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×3, I×6
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 4/11 correct (33%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×8
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 3/10 correct (31%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 4/13 correct (32%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×1, I×6
  Elopement: freq 5

Session 11 — 2026-03-07 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 4/12 correct (30%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×1, I×6
  sounds out CVC words: 2/11 correct (19%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 2/15 correct (10%); latency 5.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×10
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 2/8 correct (27%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 2/12 correct (17%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×4, I×1
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 3/9 correct (30%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  Elopement: freq 5

Session 12 — 2026-03-09 — 47 min — 1 observer
  single-word mands for preferred items (e.g., "cookie", "iPad"): 2/11 correct (18%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  sounds out CVC words: 2/13 correct (12%); latency 5.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 1/8 correct (10%); latency 5.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  indicating 'all done' when an activity is complete: 2/11 correct (21%); latency 5.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×7
  requesting preferred items using AAC device (e.g., "I want cookie please"): 2/11 correct (20%); latency 5.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  mands for missing items needed to complete an activity: 3/14 correct (19%); latency 5.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×10
  Elopement: freq 6

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Self-injurious behavior onset during task difficulty (self-biting, hair-pulling, head-hitting)
- Elopement from the work area
- Peer aggression (hitting or pushing peers during group activities)
- Vocal refusal ('no', 'I don't want to')

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Regression identified**: accuracy has declined from 75% to 18% across 12 sessions.
- Accompanying behavior data suggests the decline may be function-related.

## Pattern Classification
regression

Previously-established responding has declined across recent sessions, warranting review of environmental and reinforcement variables.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Elopement: escape
  Evidence: behavior occurs in the context of demand presentation and terminates contingent on task removal.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Conduct reinforcer assessment to identify current high-preference items.
- Review recent environmental or schedule changes that may be affecting performance.
- Return temporarily to a previously-mastered prompt level and re-fade systematically.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- If problem behavior accompanies regression, strengthen replacement-behavior training for the hypothesized function.

### Consequence strategies
- Increase reinforcement magnitude and schedule temporarily (return to CRF if needed).
- Implement more frequent maintenance probes (at least weekly) after re-mastery.

### Crisis plan
- If regression co-occurs with severe behavior (SIB, aggression, property destruction) reaching the learner's safety threshold: pause all skill-acquisition programming, implement environmental safety measures (clear the area of hazards, move peers to safe distance), and contact the supervising BCBA.
- Staff should first attempt verbal de-escalation and least-restrictive strategies; physical intervention is used only as a last resort and only by staff currently certified in the facility's crisis-prevention framework (e.g., Safety-Care, CPI, or equivalent).
- Physical intervention is applied only when specifically authorized in this learner's BIP. Many learners have contraindications (medical conditions, developmental or age-related factors, trauma history, or explicit BIP restrictions) that rule out restrictive procedures — in those cases the crisis plan defaults to verbal de-escalation, environmental safety measures, and immediate supervisor / emergency contact without physical intervention.

## Escalation Level
4 — Safety immediate

Safety-critical signals require immediate cessation of current program and direct BCBA contact; consider crisis-plan activation.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 12 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 12 sessions: 50.7%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 75%, last session: 18%).
- Elopement: mean 4.0/session (early-window mean 2.5 -> late-window mean 5.2).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a NET program for this skill.

Target: spontaneously reports past events
Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L2
Learner: School-Age Learner
Mastery Status: Emerging

Please include the MO arrangement, natural opportunity, prompt strategy, natural reinforcer, generalization tactics, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: spontaneously reports past events
- Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Create a small environmental change (new item, familiar item in new location, surprise event) that invites a verbal comment or question.
Primary natural context: room transition.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's room transition routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Model + immediate fade
Deliver a vocal/gestural model if no response within the motivated moment; fade to expectant look over sessions.
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, begin with a model prompt delivered during the motivated moment; fade to expectant look across sessions.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: adult attends to the comment with matching affect.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 4 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 3 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Fluent exchange (response within 3 s of MO / opportunity) with appropriate topography, 80% of opportunities across 3 sessions.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Here is a multi-session behavioral log for a learner. Analyze it and provide your clinical interpretation using the structured format.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-4235
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Home Skills + Independent Living + Mand
Date range: Sessions 1–10 across 20 days (2026-03-11 to 2026-03-31)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. requesting assistance using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. self-advocacy statements (Independent Living)
   Method: BST
3. doing laundry (Home Skills)
   Method: Task Analysis

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-03-11 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 12/14 correct (86%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×8
  self-advocacy statements: 8/11 correct (77%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  doing laundry: 7/8 correct (91%); latency 1.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4

Session 2 — 2026-03-13 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/15 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×1, I×10
  self-advocacy statements: 2/8 correct (26%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  doing laundry: 5/11 correct (46%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×6

Session 3 — 2026-03-15 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 10/12 correct (80%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  self-advocacy statements: 11/15 correct (74%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×4, I×6
  doing laundry: 13/15 correct (86%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×4, I×9

Session 4 — 2026-03-17 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/13 correct (36%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×2
  self-advocacy statements: 3/9 correct (29%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  doing laundry: 5/12 correct (45%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×0, I×6

Session 5 — 2026-03-19 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 11/12 correct (88%); latency 1.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×0, I×8
  self-advocacy statements: 11/14 correct (75%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  doing laundry: 13/14 correct (90%); latency 1.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×1, I×6

Session 6 — 2026-03-21 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/13 correct (34%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×8
  self-advocacy statements: 2/8 correct (25%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  doing laundry: 5/12 correct (40%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×2, I×3

Session 7 — 2026-03-23 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 7/8 correct (84%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  self-advocacy statements: 8/10 correct (76%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  doing laundry: 11/13 correct (86%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×6

Session 8 — 2026-03-25 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/10 correct (36%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×6
  self-advocacy statements: 3/9 correct (32%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×1
  doing laundry: 4/11 correct (39%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×2

Session 9 — 2026-03-27 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 10/11 correct (87%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  self-advocacy statements: 12/15 correct (79%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×12
  doing laundry: 14/15 correct (90%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×3, I×8

Session 10 — 2026-03-29 — 53 min — 1 observer
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 3/8 correct (36%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  self-advocacy statements: 3/9 correct (33%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  doing laundry: 7/15 correct (45%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×2, I×7

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Echolalic responding (repeating SD rather than answering)
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)
- Leaving seat without permission
- Playing with non-task materials

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Generalization failure**: strong performance in training context but failure to generalize to novel conditions.
- Skill may be under restricted stimulus control.

## Pattern Classification
generalization_failure

Alternation between strong training performance and poor novel-condition performance indicates restricted stimulus control.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Implement structured generalization training: vary therapists, settings, and materials systematically.
- Use multiple-exemplar training — teach with 3–5 different stimulus sets.
- Program common stimuli across training and generalization settings.

### Consequence strategies
- Consider natural-environment training (NET) to supplement DTT for this skill.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 10 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 10 sessions: 60.2%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 86%, last session: 36%).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: answers why- and how-questions
Curriculum Reference: Intraverbal L3
Learner Profile: School-Age Learner
Current Mastery: Generalization phase
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: answers why- and how-questions
- Curriculum: Intraverbal L3
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Generalization phase

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Engage the learner in a naturalistic conversation on a topic of demonstrated interest. Pause at natural turn boundaries to invite the target response.
Primary natural context: leisure chat.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's leisure chat routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Verbal fill-in
Deliver a partial phrase and pause; learner completes the vocal response.
Current prompt level: At the generalization stage, use expectant look only; avoid direct prompts. The MO itself should be sufficient to occasion the response.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: conversation continues with adult's naturally matched reply.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 4 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 3 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 3 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use across 3 different adults and 2 different settings within 2 weeks.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: spontaneously names items in the environment
Curriculum Reference: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L1
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Approaching mastery
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: spontaneously names items in the environment
- Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Approaching mastery

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Create a small environmental change (new item, familiar item in new location, surprise event) that invites a verbal comment or question.
Primary natural context: morning greeting.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's morning greeting routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Time Delay
Wait a brief interval (0->2->4 s) for independent response before delivering a model or verbal prompt.
Current prompt level: At the approaching mastery stage, use time delay (0 s -> 2 s -> 4 s) before delivering any model prompt; reinforce independent responses differentially.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: adult attends to the comment with matching affect.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 5 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 3 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 3 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Average rate of ≥ 3 spontaneous responses per 30-minute session across 3 consecutive sessions.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.

spontaneously names items in the environment


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a NET program for this skill.

Target: answers WH-questions about familiar topics
Curriculum: Intraverbal L2
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Near mastery

Please include the MO arrangement, natural opportunity, prompt strategy, natural reinforcer, generalization tactics, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: answers WH-questions about familiar topics
- Curriculum: Intraverbal L2
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Near mastery

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Engage the learner in a naturalistic conversation on a topic of demonstrated interest. Pause at natural turn boundaries to invite the target response.
Primary natural context: leisure chat.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's leisure chat routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Time Delay
Wait a brief interval (0->2->4 s) for independent response before delivering a model or verbal prompt.
Current prompt level: At the near mastery stage, use expectant look only; avoid direct prompts. The MO itself should be sufficient to occasion the response.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: conversation continues with adult's naturally matched reply.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 3 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use with a peer in unstructured free play across 2 consecutive sessions.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.

answers WH-questions about familiar topics


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a Task Analysis program for this multi-step skill.

Target: clocking in at start of shift
Curriculum: AFLS Vocational Skills
Learner: Adult Learner
Mastery Status: Emerging

Please include the task analysis (numbered steps), chain type, prompt strategy per step, error correction, reinforcement, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: clocking in at start of shift
- Curriculum: AFLS Vocational Skills
- Learner: Adult Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This Task Analysis program teaches the target skill as a chain of discrete steps, each taught and reinforced until the learner can complete the full sequence independently.

## Task Analysis
Chain type: Total-task presentation
Prompt the learner through the entire chain every trial; fade prompts across all steps simultaneously.

Steps:
1. Arrive at the workplace by the scheduled time.
2. Locate the time clock or digital system.
3. Enter identification (ID card / badge / code).
4. Confirm the clock-in timestamp.
5. Notify the supervisor or check the day's task list.
6. Proceed to the assigned workstation.

## Prompt Strategy Per Step
Strategy: Most-to-Least
Start with full-physical prompt at each step; fade to partial physical, gestural, verbal, independent.
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, use full-physical or partial-physical prompts at each step; fade systematically.

## Error Correction Procedure
Model -> prompt -> fade: Demonstrate the correct step; provide physical or gestural prompt as needed; fade prompt across subsequent trials

## Reinforcement
CRF per step (acquisition) — Continuous reinforcement for each correctly-completed step during acquisition.
Pair the terminal reinforcer with the natural consequence of the completed task (e.g., clean hands, clean dishes, completed routine).

## Mastery Criteria
Chain self-initiated from the appropriate antecedent (no verbal prompt to begin) across 3 consecutive opportunities.

## Data Collection
Per-step data: each step is scored for independence / prompt level on every trial. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full chain across 2 different settings and with 2 different adults. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.