Computing With Words for Student Strategy Evaluation in an Examination

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2005.00868v1
• Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 15:57:54 GMT
• Title: Computing With Words for Student Strategy Evaluation in an Examination
• Authors: Prashant K Gupta, and Pranab K. Muhuri
• Abstract summary: This paper reports a novel Per C based approach for student strategy evaluation. It generates a numeric score for the overall evaluation of strategy adopted by a student in the examination. A linguistic evaluation describing the student strategy is also obtained from the system.
• Score: 11.468266186093828
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In the framework of Granular Computing (GC), Interval type 2 Fuzzy Sets (IT2 FSs) play a prominent role by facilitating a better representation of uncertain linguistic information. Perceptual Computing (Per C), a well known computing with words (CWW) approach, and its various applications have nicely exploited this advantage. This paper reports a novel Per C based approach for student strategy evaluation. Examinations are generally oriented to test the subject knowledge of students. The number of questions that they are able to solve accurately judges success rates of students in the examinations. However, we feel that not only the solutions of questions, but also the strategy adopted for finding those solutions are equally important. More marks should be awarded to a student, who solves a question with a better strategy compared to a student, whose strategy is relatively not that good. Furthermore, the students strategy can be taken as a measure of his or her learning outcome as perceived by a faculty member. This can help to identify students, whose learning outcomes are not good, and, thus, can be provided with any relevant help, for improvement. The main contribution of this paper is to illustrate the use of CWW for student strategy evaluation and present a comparison of the recommendations generated by different CWW approaches. CWW provides us with two major advantages. First, it generates a numeric score for the overall evaluation of strategy adopted by a student in the examination. This enables comparison and ranking of the students based on their performances. Second, a linguistic evaluation describing the student strategy is also obtained from the system. Both these numeric score and linguistic recommendation are together used to assess the quality of a students strategy. We found that Per-C generates unique recommendations in all cases and outperforms other CWW approaches.

Related papers

• Exposía: Academic Writing Assessment of Exposés and Peer Feedback [56.428320613219306]
  We present Exposa, the first public dataset that connects writing and feedback assessment in higher education.<n>We use Exposa to benchmark state-of-the-art open-source large language models (LLMs) for two tasks: automated scoring of (1) the proposals and (2) the student reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-10T11:33:26Z)
• UCO: A Multi-Turn Interactive Reinforcement Learning Method for Adaptive Teaching with Large Language Models [59.693733170193944]
  Large language models (LLMs) are shifting from answer providers to intelligent tutors in educational settings.<n>Recent reinforcement learning approaches address this limitation but face two critical challenges.<n>We propose the Unidirectional Cognitive Optimization (UCO) method to address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T01:27:02Z)
• Optimizing Peer Grading: A Systematic Literature Review of Reviewer Assignment Strategies and Quantity of Reviewers [0.0]
  This paper investigates how reviewer-assignment strategies and the number of reviews per submission impact the accuracy, fairness, and educational value of peer assessment.<n>We identified four common reviewer-assignment strategies: random assignment, competency-based assignment, social-network-based assignment, and bidding.<n>In terms of review count, assigning three reviews per submission emerges as the most common practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-08T15:28:39Z)
• Scaling Success: A Systematic Review of Peer Grading Strategies for Accuracy, Efficiency, and Learning in Contemporary Education [0.0]
  This paper presents a systematic review of 122 peer-reviewed studies on peer grading spanning over four decades.<n>We propose a comprehensive taxonomy that organizes peer grading systems along two key dimensions: evaluation approaches and reviewer weighting strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-08T15:22:06Z)
• CoTAL: Human-in-the-Loop Prompt Engineering, Chain-of-Thought Reasoning, and Active Learning for Generalizable Formative Assessment Scoring [2.249916681499244]
  Methods such as chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enable teachers to grade formative assessments in science. The extent to which these methods generalize across curricula in multiple domains remains largely untested. We introduce Chain-of-Thought Prompting + Active Learning (CoTAL), an LLM-based approach to formative assessment scoring.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T06:53:34Z)
• Transforming Student Evaluation with Adaptive Intelligence and Performance Analytics [0.0]
  This paper creates a system for the evaluation of students performance using Artificial intelligence. There are formats of questions in the system which comprises multiple choice, short answers and descriptive questions. The platform has intelligent learning progressions where the user will be able to monitor his/her performances to be recommended a certain level of performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:57:51Z)
• Scoping Review of Active Learning Strategies and their Evaluation Environments for Entity Recognition Tasks [0.6462260690750605]
  We analyzed 62 relevant papers and identified 106 active learning strategies. We grouped them into three categories: exploitation-based (60x), exploration-based (14x), and hybrid strategies (32x)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T12:40:35Z)
• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [55.33653554387953]
  Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI) has led to numerous literature reviews aimed at collecting and fragmented information. This paper presents a thorough analysis of these literature reviews within the PAMI field. We try to address three core research questions: (1) What are the prevalent structural and statistical characteristics of PAMI literature reviews; (2) What strategies can researchers employ to efficiently navigate the growing corpus of reviews; and (3) What are the advantages and limitations of AI-generated reviews compared to human-authored ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• Student Mastery or AI Deception? Analyzing ChatGPT's Assessment Proficiency and Evaluating Detection Strategies [1.633179643849375]
  Generative AI systems such as ChatGPT have a disruptive effect on learning and assessment. This work investigates the performance of ChatGPT by evaluating it across three courses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-27T20:10:13Z)
• The potential of large language models for improving probability learning: A study on ChatGPT3.5 and first-year computer engineering students [0.565395466029518]
  ChatGPT is a large-scale language model that can solve probability problems. ChatGPT is used in solving probability problems typically presented in computer engineering exams. The model's ability to deliver high-quality explanations and illustrate solutions in any programming language suggests that large language models have the potential to serve as learning assistants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T12:54:58Z)
• UKP-SQuARE: An Interactive Tool for Teaching Question Answering [61.93372227117229]
  The exponential growth of question answering (QA) has made it an indispensable topic in any Natural Language Processing (NLP) course. We introduce UKP-SQuARE as a platform for QA education. Students can run, compare, and analyze various QA models from different perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T11:29:04Z)
• Active Learning for Abstractive Text Summarization [50.79416783266641]
  We propose the first effective query strategy for Active Learning in abstractive text summarization. We show that using our strategy in AL annotation helps to improve the model performance in terms of ROUGE and consistency scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-09T10:33:14Z)
• Ranking Scientific Papers Using Preference Learning [48.78161994501516]
  We cast it as a paper ranking problem based on peer review texts and reviewer scores. We introduce a novel, multi-faceted generic evaluation framework for making final decisions based on peer reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-02T19:41:47Z)
• ProtoTransformer: A Meta-Learning Approach to Providing Student Feedback [54.142719510638614]
  In this paper, we frame the problem of providing feedback as few-shot classification. A meta-learner adapts to give feedback to student code on a new programming question from just a few examples by instructors. Our approach was successfully deployed to deliver feedback to 16,000 student exam-solutions in a programming course offered by a tier 1 university.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-23T22:41:28Z)
• Learning active learning at the crossroads? evaluation and discussion [0.03807314298073299]
  Active learning aims to reduce annotation cost by predicting which samples are useful for a human expert to label. There is no best active learning strategy that consistently outperforms all others in all applications. We present the results of a benchmark performed on 20 datasets that compares a strategy learned using a recent meta-learning algorithm with margin sampling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-16T10:35:43Z)
• Effects of Human vs. Automatic Feedback on Students' Understanding of AI Concepts and Programming Style [0.0]
  The use of automatic grading tools has become nearly ubiquitous in large undergraduate programming courses. There is a relative lack of data directly comparing student outcomes when receiving computer-generated feedback and human-written feedback. This paper addresses this gap by splitting one 90-student class into two feedback groups and analyzing differences in the two cohorts' performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-20T21:40:32Z)
• Hierarchical Bi-Directional Self-Attention Networks for Paper Review Rating Recommendation [81.55533657694016]
  We propose a Hierarchical bi-directional self-attention Network framework (HabNet) for paper review rating prediction and recommendation. Specifically, we leverage the hierarchical structure of the paper reviews with three levels of encoders: sentence encoder (level one), intra-review encoder (level two) and inter-review encoder (level three) We are able to identify useful predictors to make the final acceptance decision, as well as to help discover the inconsistency between numerical review ratings and text sentiment conveyed by reviewers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-02T08:07:50Z)
• Catch Me if I Can: Detecting Strategic Behaviour in Peer Assessment [61.24399136715106]
  We consider the issue of strategic behaviour in various peer-assessment tasks, including peer grading of exams or homeworks and peer review in hiring or promotions. Our focus is on designing methods for detection of such manipulations. Specifically, we consider a setting in which agents evaluate a subset of their peers and output rankings that are later aggregated to form a final ordering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-08T15:08:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.