[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: shows items to others spontaneously
Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
Learner: Early 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: shows items to others spontaneously
- Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
- Learner: Early 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
Arrange a shared activity with one or more peers where the target response is naturally occasioned (turn-taking game, shared snack, collaborative task).
Primary natural context: shared snack.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's shared snack 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: peer engages back; activity continues with both.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

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

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use of target response across 3 natural opportunities per day for 3 consecutive days.

## 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.


[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: copies basic shapes from model
Curriculum: Writing L1
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Generalization phase

Include the full DTT trial structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: copies basic shapes from model
- Curriculum: Writing L1
- Learner: Early 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: "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: Most-to-Least (errorless)
Sequence: full physical -> partial physical -> gestural -> positional -> independent
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 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: square, star, heart
Distractor stimuli: diamond, circle
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
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
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 5 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 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: putting on pants
Curriculum: AFLS Basic Living Skills
Learner Level: Adolescent Learner
Baseline: Approaching mastery

Include the full Task Analysis structure.

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

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: Least-to-Most
Allow independent attempt; add progressively more intrusive prompts only if learner does not initiate.
Current prompt level: At the approaching mastery stage, use partial-physical or gestural prompts only at steps where errors occur; allow independence elsewhere.

## 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
100% of steps completed independently (no prompts) across 3 consecutive trials of the full chain.

## 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 2 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]
Design a Discrete Trial Training program for the following.

Skill: selects correct item from array of 4–6
Curriculum: Listener Responding L2
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Emerging

Include the full DTT trial structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: selects correct item from array of 4–6
- Curriculum: Listener Responding L2
- 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: "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: Most-to-Least (errorless)
Sequence: full physical -> partial physical -> gestural -> positional -> independent
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 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: blanket, bottle, napkin
Distractor stimuli: block, sock, jacket, plate
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
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every 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 5 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 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: Near mastery

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: Near mastery

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: Stimulus Fading
Sequence: exaggerated stimulus -> moderate fade -> minimal fade -> natural stimulus
Current prompt level: At the near mastery 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: scissors, plate, shoe
Distractor stimuli: jacket, cup
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Return to previous prompt level that produced success -> successful response -> re-attempt at target prompt level.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## 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 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 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: mands using complete sentences with correct grammar
Curriculum Reference: Mand L3
Learner Profile: Adolescent Learner
Current Mastery: Developing
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: mands using complete sentences with correct grammar
- Curriculum: Mand L3
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

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
Briefly withhold or restrict access to the target preferred item/activity for 30–60 seconds to establish motivation before the teaching opportunity.
Primary natural context: free play.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's free play 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 developing stage, begin with a model prompt delivered during the motivated moment; fade to expectant look across sessions.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: immediate access to the requested item for 30–60 seconds.
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 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.

mands using complete sentences with correct grammar


[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-8403
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Mand + Reading + Tact + Tolerating Denied Access + Writing
Date range: Sessions 1–12 across 24 days (2026-09-18 to 2026-10-12)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. sounds out CVC words (Reading)
   Method: DTT
2. wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
3. indicating completion ('all done', 'finished') (Mand)
   Method: NET
4. tacts colors of objects (Tact)
   Method: DTT
5. copies simple words from model (Writing)
   Method: DTT
6. tacts common objects (Tact)
   Method: DTT

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-09-18 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 9/15 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×5, G×4, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/8 correct (65%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 10/13 correct (77%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  tacts colors of objects: 7/11 correct (60%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 9/15 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×6
  tacts common objects: 9/12 correct (73%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×4, I×4

Session 2 — 2026-09-20 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 5/9 correct (60%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/10 correct (63%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×3
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 10/13 correct (76%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×1, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 9/15 correct (60%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×5, I×3
  copies simple words from model: 4/8 correct (56%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  tacts common objects: 9/14 correct (68%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×11

Session 3 — 2026-09-22 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 8/14 correct (61%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×4, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 8/13 correct (65%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×9
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 7/10 correct (69%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 6/10 correct (58%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 7/13 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×2, I×4
  tacts common objects: 8/11 correct (72%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×3

Session 4 — 2026-09-24 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 8/15 correct (56%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×11
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 9/15 correct (62%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 11/15 correct (73%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×5, G×5, I×3
  tacts colors of objects: 5/9 correct (54%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  copies simple words from model: 6/11 correct (56%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  tacts common objects: 11/15 correct (73%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×6

Session 5 — 2026-09-26 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 3/9 correct (30%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 3/8 correct (34%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 6/12 correct (47%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  tacts colors of objects: 3/10 correct (31%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 3/9 correct (33%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  tacts common objects: 5/10 correct (46%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×6

Session 6 — 2026-09-28 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 5/15 correct (34%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×3, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/13 correct (40%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 6/12 correct (51%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×2, I×3
  tacts colors of objects: 5/15 correct (35%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×5, G×3, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 6/15 correct (38%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  tacts common objects: 5/10 correct (48%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×4

Session 7 — 2026-09-30 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 3/8 correct (37%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/12 correct (47%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×7
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  tacts colors of objects: 3/8 correct (37%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×3
  copies simple words from model: 4/10 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×7
  tacts common objects: 7/13 correct (54%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×2

Session 8 — 2026-10-02 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 3/8 correct (41%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 7/15 correct (47%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×13
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 7/13 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×0, I×9
  tacts colors of objects: 6/14 correct (44%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×8
  copies simple words from model: 7/15 correct (49%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×5, I×5
  tacts common objects: 8/12 correct (63%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×0, I×6

Session 9 — 2026-10-04 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 5/10 correct (54%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/12 correct (50%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×5
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 9/14 correct (62%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×8
  tacts colors of objects: 4/10 correct (45%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 4/8 correct (56%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  tacts common objects: 11/15 correct (72%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×5, PP×2, G×3, I×5

Session 10 — 2026-10-06 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 9/15 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×5, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/13 correct (50%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×2, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 9/13 correct (71%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×9
  tacts colors of objects: 5/10 correct (50%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 8/14 correct (59%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  tacts common objects: 9/13 correct (72%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×7

Session 11 — 2026-10-08 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 5/8 correct (58%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 7/13 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×4, I×1
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 7/9 correct (74%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×6
  tacts colors of objects: 5/9 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 5/8 correct (60%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  tacts common objects: 7/10 correct (72%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×7

Session 12 — 2026-10-10 — 35 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 6/10 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/8 correct (65%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 11/15 correct (74%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×10
  tacts colors of objects: 8/14 correct (57%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×1, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 7/12 correct (60%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×6
  tacts common objects: 6/8 correct (72%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×7

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals

[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.

## 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.

## 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: 12 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 12 sessions: 50.3%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 57%, last session: 58%).
- 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]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-6581
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Independent Living + Mand + Self-Care + Tolerating Denied Access + Vocational
Date range: Sessions 1–6 across 12 days (2026-02-20 to 2026-03-04)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. clocking in at start of shift (Vocational)
   Method: Task Analysis
2. brushing teeth independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. dressing (pants, shirt) (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
4. scheduling medical appointments (Independent Living)
   Method: Task Analysis
5. requesting a break during extended tasks (Mand)
   Method: NET
6. wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Elopement — function hypothesized: automatic

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-02-20 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 5/10 correct (49%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (45%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/12 correct (49%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×4, I×6
  scheduling medical appointments: 7/14 correct (47%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×11
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/15 correct (54%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 2 — 2026-02-22 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 5/8 correct (58%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (50%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/10 correct (59%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×8
  scheduling medical appointments: 6/11 correct (52%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×4
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 4/8 correct (51%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×2
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (62%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×1, I×4
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 3 — 2026-02-24 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 7/10 correct (68%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  brushing teeth independently: 6/10 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 7/10 correct (68%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×7
  scheduling medical appointments: 8/15 correct (56%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/15 correct (61%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×4, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (71%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×2
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 4 — 2026-02-26 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 8/10 correct (77%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  brushing teeth independently: 8/12 correct (64%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×7
  dressing (pants, shirt): 8/10 correct (75%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  scheduling medical appointments: 9/14 correct (65%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 8/11 correct (71%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 9/11 correct (78%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  Elopement: freq 2

Session 5 — 2026-02-28 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 11/13 correct (82%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×0, I×8
  brushing teeth independently: 10/14 correct (69%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×9
  dressing (pants, shirt): 10/13 correct (75%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×9
  scheduling medical appointments: 9/12 correct (72%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 8/11 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/9 correct (83%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  Elopement: freq 3

Session 6 — 2026-03-02 — 48 min — 1 observer
  clocking in at start of shift: 11/13 correct (82%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×0, I×7
  brushing teeth independently: 9/13 correct (72%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×4, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 8/11 correct (75%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  scheduling medical appointments: 6/8 correct (77%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 8/11 correct (74%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 13/15 correct (83%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×1, I×6
  Elopement: freq 3

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Looking away during SD presentation
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)
- Playing with non-task materials

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
- **Skill loss following break**: performance dropped to 49% at return, recovering to 82%.
- Maintenance schedule should be reviewed and strengthened.

## Pattern Classification
skill_loss_after_break

Sharp drop at the start of the log followed by gradual recovery indicates skill loss following an absence.

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

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Implement booster sessions at the most-recently-effective prompt level.
- Increase session frequency temporarily until pre-break levels are recovered.

### Consequence strategies
- Review and strengthen the maintenance schedule to prevent future skill loss.
- Consider sending practice materials home during extended breaks.

## 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: 6 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 6 sessions: 69.5%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 49%, last session: 82%).
- Elopement: mean 2.5/session (early-window mean 2.5 -> late-window mean 3.0).
- 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]
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: Near mastery
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: 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 5 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 3 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 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.


[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: matches identical objects
Curriculum Reference: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L1
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Near mastery
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: matches identical objects
- Curriculum: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Near mastery

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: "Match"
Variations: "Find the same"; "Put with same"
Presentation: Present the sample stimulus and an array of comparison stimuli simultaneously.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
Current prompt level: At the near mastery 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: sock, spoon, glue
Distractor stimuli: scissors, blanket
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
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy across 2 consecutive sessions with at least 10 trials each.

## 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]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: tolerates proximity of peers during parallel play
Curriculum Reference: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Near mastery
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: tolerates proximity of peers during parallel play
- Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
- 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
Arrange a shared activity with one or more peers where the target response is naturally occasioned (turn-taking game, shared snack, collaborative task).
Primary natural context: circle time.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's circle time 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 near mastery stage, use expectant look only; avoid direct prompts. The MO itself should be sufficient to occasion the response.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: peer engages back; activity continues with both.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 3 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 3 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.

tolerates proximity of peers during parallel play


[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-3672
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Intraverbal + Mand + Motor Imitation + Tact
Date range: Sessions 1–6 across 12 days (2026-10-25 to 2026-11-06)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. indicating completion ('all done', 'finished') (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. answers WH-questions about familiar topics (Intraverbal)
   Method: NET
3. imitates 3-step motor sequences (Motor Imitation)
   Method: DTT variant
4. tacts colors of objects (Tact)
   Method: DTT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Self-injurious behavior (SIB) — function hypothesized: escape

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-10-25 — 59 min — 1 observer
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 4/8 correct (50%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 9/15 correct (61%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×10
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 6/12 correct (53%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×4, I×3
  tacts colors of objects: 6/11 correct (54%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×8
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 2

Session 2 — 2026-10-27 — 59 min — 1 observer
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 6/12 correct (48%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 5/8 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 6/10 correct (62%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×7
  tacts colors of objects: 4/8 correct (48%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 4

Session 3 — 2026-10-29 — 59 min — 1 observer
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 7/14 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×14
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 5/8 correct (59%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×2
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 6/9 correct (64%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  tacts colors of objects: 7/12 correct (55%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×4
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 11

Session 4 — 2026-10-31 — 59 min — 1 observer
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 4/9 correct (50%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 5/9 correct (59%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 4/8 correct (55%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  tacts colors of objects: 6/11 correct (56%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 11

Session 5 — 2026-11-02 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 51% (primary); IOA 85% agreement
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 66% (primary); IOA 85% agreement
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 59% (primary); IOA 85% agreement
  tacts colors of objects: 53% (primary); IOA 85% agreement
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 2; IOA 85% agreement

Session 6 — 2026-11-04 — 59 min — 1 observer
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 5/8 correct (59%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×5
  answers WH-questions about familiar topics: 8/13 correct (64%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×10
  imitates 3-step motor sequences: 7/11 correct (64%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  tacts colors of objects: 9/15 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×10
  Self-injurious behavior (SIB): freq 2

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Aggression attempt directed at staff (hit, kick, or scratch toward adult)
- Elopement from the work area

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Extinction burst** observed: temporary increase in problem behavior consistent with an extinction procedure.
- This is an expected phase of behavior change and typically indicates the intervention is working.

## Pattern Classification
extinction_burst

Mid-log spike in problem-behavior frequency followed by recovery is consistent with a planned extinction procedure.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Self-injurious behavior (SIB): escape
  Evidence: behavior occurs in the context of demand presentation and terminates contingent on task removal.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Maintain current antecedent arrangements — do not add extra demand.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- Ensure replacement response is available and reinforced at high magnitude during the burst.

### Consequence strategies
- **Maintain current protocol** — consistency during extinction bursts is critical.
- Ensure all team members are trained on the procedure.

### Crisis plan
- If problem-behavior intensity or topography exceeds the learner's baseline safety threshold (SIB causing tissue damage, aggression causing injury, imminent elopement into hazard): pause the extinction procedure and implement the facility's tiered crisis-prevention protocol (e.g., Safety-Care, CPI, or equivalent).
- De-escalation and environmental safety first; physical intervention is last resort and only by staff currently certified in the facility's framework. Least-restrictive option appropriate to the risk level applies at every step. Physical intervention is used only when specifically authorized for this learner in the BIP — contraindications (medical, developmental, trauma history) may restrict the procedures available, in which case the plan is de-escalation + environmental safety + supervisor contact only.
- Contact the supervising BCBA immediately; do not resume the extinction procedure without BCBA review. Document duration, intensity, antecedent, staff response, and post-incident state.

## 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: 6 sessions of data with IOA evidence.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 6 sessions: 52.0%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 50%, last session: 59%).
- Self-injurious behavior (SIB): mean 5.3/session (early-window mean 3.0 -> late-window mean 2.0).
- IOA data: 85% agreement on IOA session — adequate.


[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: selects items by class from array of 5–8
Curriculum: LRFFC L2
Learner: School-Age Learner
Mastery Status: Near mastery

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

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: selects items by class from array of 5–8
- Curriculum: LRFFC L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Near mastery

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: Graduated Guidance
Sequence: hand over hand full -> hand over hand light -> shadow -> independent
Current prompt level: At the near mastery 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: block, pencil, ball
Distractor stimuli: toothbrush, blanket, car, towel
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Return to previous prompt level that produced success -> successful response -> re-attempt at target prompt level.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. 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 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.

selects items by class from array of 5–8


[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-9140
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Listener Responding + Mand + Reading + Writing
Date range: Sessions 1–11 across 22 days (2026-01-21 to 2026-02-12)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. selects items by feature (Listener Responding)
   Method: DTT
2. indicating completion ('all done', 'finished') (Mand)
   Method: NET
3. copies simple words from model (Writing)
   Method: DTT
4. sounds out CVC words (Reading)
   Method: DTT

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-01-21 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 7/8 correct (82%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 9/10 correct (90%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×1
  copies simple words from model: 11/13 correct (84%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×2, I×6
  sounds out CVC words: 6/8 correct (81%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×5

Session 2 — 2026-01-23 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 4/13 correct (30%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×9
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 2/11 correct (21%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  copies simple words from model: 3/11 correct (30%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×2, I×3
  sounds out CVC words: 5/13 correct (38%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×3, I×4

Session 3 — 2026-01-25 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 7/9 correct (81%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 9/10 correct (90%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 10/13 correct (75%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 12/15 correct (79%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×9

Session 4 — 2026-01-27 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 4/13 correct (31%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×4, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 4/14 correct (30%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×11
  copies simple words from model: 4/10 correct (37%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  sounds out CVC words: 4/11 correct (34%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×7

Session 5 — 2026-01-29 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 8/10 correct (80%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×8
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 10/12 correct (87%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 11/13 correct (81%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×9
  sounds out CVC words: 8/10 correct (80%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×3

Session 6 — 2026-01-31 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 4/10 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×8
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 2/10 correct (24%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 4/13 correct (33%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  sounds out CVC words: 3/11 correct (30%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×8

Session 7 — 2026-02-02 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 6/8 correct (77%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 9/10 correct (89%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×3
  copies simple words from model: 11/14 correct (82%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×11
  sounds out CVC words: 6/8 correct (79%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4

Session 8 — 2026-02-04 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 5/14 correct (33%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×10
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 3/9 correct (28%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 3/9 correct (32%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×0
  sounds out CVC words: 5/12 correct (38%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×0, I×6

Session 9 — 2026-02-06 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 11/13 correct (81%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×10
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 10/11 correct (91%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×9
  copies simple words from model: 7/9 correct (81%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  sounds out CVC words: 7/8 correct (85%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×5

Session 10 — 2026-02-08 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 5/14 correct (33%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×11
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 3/13 correct (22%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×3, I×2
  copies simple words from model: 4/10 correct (39%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×3
  sounds out CVC words: 4/14 correct (32%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×0, I×9

Session 11 — 2026-02-10 — 49 min — 1 observer
  selects items by feature: 12/15 correct (83%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×4, I×8
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 13/15 correct (85%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×5, PP×4, G×5, I×1
  copies simple words from model: 8/11 correct (77%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×2, I×3
  sounds out CVC words: 8/9 correct (87%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×4

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Delayed responding (>5 seconds consistently)
- Playing with non-task materials

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
- **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: 11 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 11 sessions: 58.5%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 82%, last session: 83%).
- 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: maintains friendships over time
Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L3
Learner: School-Age 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: maintains friendships over time
- Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L3
- Learner: School-Age 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
Arrange a shared activity with one or more peers where the target response is naturally occasioned (turn-taking game, shared snack, collaborative task).
Primary natural context: circle time.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's circle time 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 near mastery stage, use expectant look only; avoid direct prompts. The MO itself should be sufficient to occasion the response.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: peer engages back; activity continues with both.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 4 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.


[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-6284
Profile: Early Learner (dev age 0–48 months)
Curricula: Listener Responding + Mand
Date range: Sessions 1–9 across 18 days (2026-09-14 to 2026-10-02)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. 2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please") (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. follows 1-step motor instructions (Listener Responding)
   Method: DTT
3. indicating completion ('all done', 'finished') (Mand)
   Method: NET

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Tantrum — function hypothesized: escape

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-09-14 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 9/11 correct (82%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×6
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 9/11 correct (83%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×6
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 13/15 correct (84%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×2, I×7
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 15m total

Session 2 — 2026-09-16 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 4/13 correct (29%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×3, I×10
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 3/12 correct (29%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×7
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 3/11 correct (30%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  Tantrum: freq 4, duration 8m total

Session 3 — 2026-09-18 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 7/8 correct (83%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×3
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 10/12 correct (83%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 10/11 correct (90%); latency 1.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×8
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 9m total

Session 4 — 2026-09-20 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 4/14 correct (30%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×12
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 3/9 correct (36%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 2/9 correct (21%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 6m total

Session 5 — 2026-09-22 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 7/8 correct (85%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 10/12 correct (83%); latency 2.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×0, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 12/14 correct (86%); latency 1.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 9m total

Session 6 — 2026-09-24 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 5/14 correct (34%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×9
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 2/8 correct (31%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 3/13 correct (27%); latency 4.7s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  Tantrum: freq 4, duration 20m total

Session 7 — 2026-09-26 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 81% (primary); IOA 84% agreement
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 82% (primary); IOA 84% agreement
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 85% (primary); IOA 84% agreement
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 15m total; IOA 84% agreement

Session 8 — 2026-09-28 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 4/12 correct (37%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×0, I×4
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 4/14 correct (29%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×1, I×8
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 3/13 correct (22%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×8
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 15m total

Session 9 — 2026-09-30 — 57 min — 1 observer
  2-word mand phrases (e.g., "more cracker", "open please"): 10/13 correct (80%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×8
  follows 1-step motor instructions: 8/10 correct (79%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  indicating completion ('all done', 'finished'): 7/8 correct (86%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 8m total

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Looking away during SD presentation
- Echolalic responding (repeating SD rather than answering)

[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.

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

## 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: 9 sessions of data with IOA evidence.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 9 sessions: 60.2%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 82%, last session: 80%).
- Tantrum: mean 3.1/session (early-window mean 3.3 -> late-window mean 2.7).
- IOA data: 84% agreement on IOA session — adequate.


[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: selects items by class (Find the animal)
Curriculum: LRFFC L1
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Developing

Include the full DTT trial structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: selects items by class (Find the animal)
- Curriculum: LRFFC 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: "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: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
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: elephant, duck, frog
Distractor stimuli: rabbit, cat
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
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 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.

selects items by class (Find the animal)


[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: selects items by function when item not visible
Curriculum: LRFFC L2
Learner: School-Age 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: selects items by function when item not visible
- Curriculum: LRFFC L2
- Learner: School-Age 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: "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: 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 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: shoe, glue, napkin
Distractor stimuli: scissors, phone, hat, cup
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Prevent errors by using high prompts from the start; fade gradually. Paired with most-to-least prompt hierarchy.

## 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
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## 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 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.

selects items by function when item not visible


[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-9881
Profile: Adolescent Learner (13–17 years)
Curricula: Home Skills + Reading + Self-Care + Writing
Date range: Sessions 1–12 across 24 days (2026-06-20 to 2026-07-14)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. sounds out CVC words (Reading)
   Method: DTT
2. copies simple words from model (Writing)
   Method: DTT
3. meal cleanup after eating (Home Skills)
   Method: Task Analysis
4. washing hands independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Fecal smearing (scatolia) — function hypothesized: attention
2. Tantrum — function hypothesized: attention

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-06-20 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 12/15 correct (77%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×5, PP×3, G×0, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 9/12 correct (72%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×0, I×5
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/9 correct (77%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  washing hands independently: 10/13 correct (81%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 1 (1 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 0 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 8m total

Session 2 — 2026-06-22 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 12/15 correct (78%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×10
  copies simple words from model: 8/12 correct (69%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/9 correct (78%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  washing hands independently: 9/11 correct (83%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 2 (2 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 0 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 1, duration 2m total

Session 3 — 2026-06-24 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 7/9 correct (75%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 7/10 correct (65%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  meal cleanup after eating: 9/12 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×3, I×2
  washing hands independently: 8/11 correct (71%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 2 (1 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 1 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 6m total

Session 4 — 2026-06-26 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 7/10 correct (70%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 6/10 correct (57%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/9 correct (72%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  washing hands independently: 8/12 correct (65%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×1, I×7
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 3 (2 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 1 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 15m total

Session 5 — 2026-06-28 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 8/12 correct (66%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×4, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 4/8 correct (47%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×2, I×3
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/12 correct (60%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×0, I×9
  washing hands independently: 8/13 correct (61%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×8
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 3 (3 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 0 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 3, duration 9m total

Session 6 — 2026-06-30 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 8/13 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 6/13 correct (46%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×11
  meal cleanup after eating: 9/15 correct (61%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×4, I×7
  washing hands independently: 4/8 correct (56%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 5 (2 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 3 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 5, duration 25m total

Session 7 — 2026-07-02 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 6/10 correct (55%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  copies simple words from model: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  meal cleanup after eating: 6/11 correct (56%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×0, I×8
  washing hands independently: 6/11 correct (52%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 6 (4 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 2 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 6, duration 12m total

Session 8 — 2026-07-04 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 7/13 correct (52%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 3/8 correct (33%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×3
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/14 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  washing hands independently: 5/10 correct (48%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×10
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 7 (7 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 0 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 5, duration 20m total

Session 9 — 2026-07-06 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  sounds out CVC words: 38% (primary); IOA 87% agreement
  copies simple words from model: 23% (primary); IOA 87% agreement
  meal cleanup after eating: 48% (primary); IOA 87% agreement
  washing hands independently: 45% (primary); IOA 87% agreement
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 6 (4 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 2 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface); IOA 87% agreement
  Tantrum: freq 6, duration 30m total; IOA 87% agreement

Session 10 — 2026-07-08 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 5/12 correct (41%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×3
  copies simple words from model: 2/13 correct (17%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  meal cleanup after eating: 4/9 correct (48%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×5
  washing hands independently: 3/8 correct (33%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 8 (7 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 1 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 7, duration 35m total

Session 11 — 2026-07-10 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 3/9 correct (35%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×4
  copies simple words from model: 1/11 correct (11%); latency 5.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  meal cleanup after eating: 4/9 correct (40%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×7
  washing hands independently: 3/8 correct (32%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 8 (5 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 3 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 8, duration 24m total

Session 12 — 2026-07-12 — 53 min — 1 observer
  sounds out CVC words: 3/11 correct (23%); latency 5.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 2/13 correct (14%); latency 5.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×10
  meal cleanup after eating: 5/12 correct (40%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  washing hands independently: 3/13 correct (26%); latency 4.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×12
  Fecal smearing (scatolia): attempts 9 (9 intercepted — staff redirected before smearing; 0 completed — feces transferred to skin, clothing, or surface)
  Tantrum: freq 8, duration 24m total

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Self-injurious behavior onset during task difficulty (self-biting, hair-pulling, head-hitting)
- Aggression attempt directed at staff (hit, kick, or scratch toward adult)
- Crying during demand presentation
- Peer aggression (hitting or pushing peers during group activities)

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Frustration pattern**: declining accuracy (77% -> 23%) with escape-indicator behaviors.
- Risk of learned helplessness and escape-maintained behavior if not addressed.

## Pattern Classification
frustration_pattern

Declining accuracy co-occurs with escape-indicator behaviors, consistent with frustration and escape-maintained responding to demand.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Fecal smearing (scatolia): attention
  Evidence: behavior occurs during low-attention periods and results in social attention contingently.
Tantrum: attention
  Evidence: behavior occurs during low-attention periods and results in social attention contingently.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- **Immediately** reduce task difficulty — drop back 1–2 prompt levels or present previously-mastered targets.
- Intersperse easy (mastered) tasks with acquisition targets at a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio.
- Shorten session length and increase break frequency.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- Teach a replacement response ('break please', 'wait please', 'all done') and reinforce it at the function of the problem behavior.
- Pair the replacement response with short, predictable escape windows.

### Consequence strategies
- Do NOT remove demand contingent on tantrum / escape behavior — this reinforces the escape function.
- Provide brief break contingent on independent replacement response instead.

### Crisis plan
- If aggression toward staff, peer aggression, SIB, or property destruction exceeds the learner's safety threshold: first use verbal de-escalation and environmental safety measures (clear the area, move peers to safe distance, remove hazards).
- If behavior continues to pose imminent risk, follow the facility's tiered crisis-intervention protocol — only staff currently certified in the facility's training (e.g., Safety-Care, CPI, PMT, or equivalent) may implement physical intervention, and the least-restrictive option appropriate to the risk level is used. Physical intervention is applied only when specifically authorized in this learner's BIP; for learners with contraindications (medical, developmental, trauma history, or explicit BIP restrictions), the plan stops at de-escalation + environmental safety + supervisor contact.
- Notify the supervising BCBA immediately; pause the skill-acquisition program until the BIP is reviewed. Document the incident (antecedent, topography, duration, staff response, post-incident state) per facility and BACB Ethics Code (2020, Section 3.05) requirements.

## Escalation Level
4 — Safety immediate

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

## Confidence
high

Pattern is well-supported: 12 sessions of data, low variance, and IOA evidence confirm reliability.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 12 sessions: 55.8%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 77%, last session: 23%).
- Fecal smearing (scatolia): mean 5.0/session (early-window mean 2.0 -> late-window mean 7.8).
- Tantrum: mean 4.7/session (early-window mean 2.0 -> late-window mean 7.2).
- IOA data: 87% agreement on IOA session — adequate.


[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: reproduces block designs from model
Curriculum: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L3
Learner: Adolescent Learner
Mastery Status: Generalization phase

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

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: reproduces block designs from model
- Curriculum: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L3
- Learner: Adolescent 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: "Match"
Variations: "Find the same"; "Put with same"
Presentation: Present the sample stimulus and an array of comparison stimuli simultaneously.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
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 6 (target + 5 distractors, mixed categories)
Target stimuli: plate, apple, glue
Distractor stimuli: towel, bottle, jacket, sock, book
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
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## 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 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: Emerging

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: 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: "What letter is this?"
Variations: "Read this letter"; "What does this say?"
Presentation: Present the letter flashcard.

## 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: I, H, D
Distractor stimuli: G, A
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 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]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: reads 10–20 sight words
Curriculum Reference: Reading L2
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Developing
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: reads 10–20 sight words
- Curriculum: Reading L2
- 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 word?"
Variations: "Read this word"; "What does it say?"
Presentation: Present the sight-word card and deliver the SD.

## 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 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: jacket, bottle, glue
Distractor stimuli: block, phone, car, ball
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
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 4 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.