arXiv AI By Adnan Labib, Yixuan Huang, Jiahui Wu, John Maurice Gayed, Zheng Yuan, Qiao Wang

WrAFT: a Modularized Automated Writing Evaluation System for Argumentative Essays

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 14524v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This study presents WrAFT, a Writing Assessment and Feedback Tool, that delivers both accurate and reliable scores and effective comprehensive feedback to argumentative essays.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

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
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.