arXiv:2601. 02580v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Traditional methods for determining assessment item parameters, such as difficulty and discrimination, rely heavily on expensive field testing to collect student performance data for Item Response Theory (IRT) calibration.
By Christopher Ormerod
arXiv:2511. 04689v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) typically requires thousands of benchmark items, making the process expensive, slow, and increasingly impractical at scale.
By Peiyu Li, Xiuxiu Tang, Si Chen, Ying Cheng, Ronald Metoyer, Ting Hua, Nitesh V. Chawla
arXiv:2607. 25257v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Item Response Theory (IRT) has recently been proposed as a framework for evaluating large language model (LLM) benchmarks by separating a model's latent ability from the properties of individual benchmark items.
By Juan Francisco, Mandujano Reyes
arXiv:2511. 21140v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are widely used as scalable evaluators of model responses in lieu of human annotators.
By Chungpa Lee, Thomas Zeng, Jongwon Jeong, Jy-yong Sohn, Kangwook Lee
arXiv:2607. 26317v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Psychometric calibration for educational tests typically requires costly human response data.
By Wenjie Zhou, Yunting Liu, Renjiao Tang, Mark Wilson
arXiv:2511. 21692v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We investigate how well large language models (LLMs) generalize across different task difficulties, a key question for effective data curation and evaluation.
By Yeganeh Kordi, Nihal V. Nayak, Max Zuo, Ilana Nguyen, Stephen H. Bach
arXiv:2607. 28634v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The estimation of item difficulty plays a key role in both formative assessment and large-scale high-stakes summative assessments.
By Xinyi Wang, Hong Jiao, Ming Li, Sydney Peters, Hanna Choi, Tianyi Zhou, Qingshu Xu
arXiv:2608. 06300v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automatic speaking assessment systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings to mark second language (L2) learners' speaking tests, making it critical to show that their scores depend on speaking proficiency rather than irrelevant speaker attributes such as first language (L1) or age.
By Arya Labroo, Mengjie Qian, Kate Knill
arXiv:2606. 06546v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) for education requires measuring how models teach, not only what they know.
By Tao Liu, Ye Lu, Ruohua Zhang, Siyu Song, Wentao Liu, Aimin Zhou, Hao Hao
arXiv:2606. 10254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved near-perfect performance in \emph{solving} high-school mathematics, their ability to \emph{evaluate} the diverse reasoning processes of real human students remains under-examined.
By Yiteng Mao, Kenan Xu, Yijia Lyu, Wenhao Li, Jianlong Chen, Xiangfeng Wang
arXiv:2509. 17314v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Software increasingly relies on the emergent capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), from natural language understanding to program analysis and generation.
By Juyeon Yoon, Somin Kim, Robert Feldt, Shin Yoo
arXiv:2607. 26067v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for estimating item difficulty in educational assessment.
By Amanda La Hadi, Muhammad Johan Alibasa, Guanliang Chen, A. Taufiq Asyhari