arXiv Machine Learning

SWIM: Student Writing Simulation via Proficiency-Conditioned Generation

The paper introduces SWIM, a task that frames student writing simulation as proficiency‑conditioned essay generation. It evaluates prompting, supervised fine‑tuning, and reinforcement learning for aligning generated essays with student proficiency profiles, using automated essay scoring as a metric. Results show that prompting alone offers limited control, while supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning significantly improve alignment across content, lexical, grammatical, and organizational traits, though low‑proficiency writing remains difficult to replicate.

arXiv AI
Aug 26

Learning to Grade Efficiently: A Bandit-Driven Prompt-Selection Framework for Low-Cost LLM Essay Scoring

The paper introduces a cost‑aware framework that treats each prompt type as an arm in a multi‑armed bandit controller, enabling adaptive selection of optimal prompting strategies during inference for automated essay scoring. Experiments on IELTS Writing Task 2 essays demonstrate that this bandit-driven approach achieves comparable scoring accuracy to exhaustive grid search while reducing LLM calls by 78.4%. The study also presents the first cost‑reliability learning curves for essay scoring, offering actionable insights for educational technology platforms balancing operational costs against assessment validity.

By Olga Manakina, Igor Bogdanov
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 21

Beyond Score Prediction: LLM-Based Essay Scoring and Feedback Generation via Reinforcement Learning with Rubric Rewards

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely applied to automated essay scoring (AES) and automated feedback generation (AFG). However, existing studies rely primarily on prompt engineering or supervised fine-tuning, while systematic research on reinforcement learning (RL) post-training and automated evaluation of feedback quality remains limited.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 7

Trait-Aware Policy Optimization for Autoregressive Multi-Trait Essay Scoring

The paper introduces Trait-Aware Policy Optimization (TAPO), a post‑training framework for autoregressive models that score essays across multiple traits. TAPO decomposes rewards by sample and trait, integrating global consistency, trait accuracy, format validity, and inter‑trait dependencies, while enriching prompts with trait descriptions. Experiments on various backbone models show TAPO consistently outperforms supervised fine‑tuning and scalar‑reward baselines, proving its effectiveness and transferability for multi‑trait essay scoring.

By Zhengyang Wang, Sanwoo Lee, Jiaxin Wang, Chenxi Miao, Weikang Li, Yunfang Wu
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

Expos\'ia: Teaching and Assessment of Academic Writing Skills for Research Project Proposals and Peer Feedback

Exposía is the first public dataset linking academic writing and feedback in higher education, comprising student research project proposals, peer and instructor comments, and free-text reviews collected from a Computer Science course. It includes human assessment scores based on a fine‑grained, pedagogically‑grounded schema for both writing and feedback. The dataset is used to benchmark large language models on automated scoring of proposals and student reviews, revealing that different LLMs excel at each task and that closed‑source models outperform open‑weight ones, while a multi‑aspect prompting strategy proves most effective for classroom deployment.

By Dennis Zyska, Alla Rozovskaya, Ilia Kuznetsov, Iryna Gurevych
arXiv Machine Learning
4d ago

Does Continued Pretraining on a Learner Corpus Improve Automated Essay Scoring on English Proficiency Tests? Evidence from EFCAMDAT

The study examines whether domain‑adaptive continued pretraining (DAPT) on a learner‑writing corpus (EFCAMDAT) can enhance transformer‑based automated essay scoring (AES) for English proficiency tests. Researchers applied DAPT to BERT, RoBERTa, and DistilBERT and compared the adapted models with their original checkpoints on the FCE and IELTS datasets, evaluating both in‑domain scoring and few‑shot cross‑dataset transfer. Results show that full‑corpus DAPT yields mixed effects, while proficiency‑specific DAPT often outperforms full‑corpus DAPT and sometimes even the non‑adapted baseline, though benefits vary by proficiency composition and encoder architecture and do not consistently transfer across tests.

By Duy Anh Nguyen