How do those interactive physics pedagogy tools help students understand concepts differently than traditional lectures?

Your question is about pedagogy generally — how interactive tools help students learn — rather than frontier physics itself. The preprints I have cover *physics education research*, which is a different field.

That said, the archive does contain relevant evidence: [AG-2024.04-1892] shows that an interactive quantum circuit simulator with immediate feedback and auto-graded tasks lowers entry barriers for students with no prior quantum knowledge. [AG-2024.06-1993] reports that gamified quantum simulations help users build intuition for quantum phenomena by letting them "experience simulated worlds that manifest obvious quantum behaviors." And [AG-2025.02-537] finds that students who integrate conceptual reasoning with mathematical formalism—guided by a structured problem-framing approach—show deeper grasp of complex topics like general relativity than those relying on formalism alone.

The common thread: interactive and conceptual scaffolding seems to work because it lets students *do* physics (or at least simulate it) rather than passively absorb equations, and it creates feedback loops that let misconceptions surface and be corrected in real time.

However, these preprints don't directly compare interactive tools to lectures in a controlled way, nor do they deeply explain the cognitive mechanisms underlying the difference—so the archive doesn't fully answer your question at the level of learning science.