Are You Doubtful? Oh, It Might Be Difficult Then! Exploring the Use of Model Uncertainty for Question Difficulty Estimation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.11831v2
• Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 20:03:13 GMT
• Title: Are You Doubtful? Oh, It Might Be Difficult Then! Exploring the Use of Model Uncertainty for Question Difficulty Estimation
• Authors: Leonidas Zotos, Hedderik van Rijn, Malvina Nissim,
• Abstract summary: We show that uncertainty features contribute substantially to difficulty prediction, where difficulty is inversely proportional to the number of students who can correctly answer a question.<n>In addition to showing the value of our approach, we also observe that our model achieves state-of-the-art results on the USMLE and CMCQRD publicly available datasets.
• Score: 12.638577140117702
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In an educational setting, an estimate of the difficulty of multiple-choice questions (MCQs), a commonly used strategy to assess learning progress, constitutes very useful information for both teachers and students. Since human assessment is costly from multiple points of view, automatic approaches to MCQ item difficulty estimation are investigated, yielding however mixed success until now. Our approach to this problem takes a different angle from previous work: asking various Large Language Models to tackle the questions included in three different MCQ datasets, we leverage model uncertainty to estimate item difficulty. By using both model uncertainty features as well as textual features in a Random Forest regressor, we show that uncertainty features contribute substantially to difficulty prediction, where difficulty is inversely proportional to the number of students who can correctly answer a question. In addition to showing the value of our approach, we also observe that our model achieves state-of-the-art results on the USMLE and CMCQRD publicly available datasets.

Related papers

• THOUGHTTERMINATOR: Benchmarking, Calibrating, and Mitigating Overthinking in Reasoning Models [65.39456695678713]
  We introduce approximate measures of problem-level difficulty and demonstrate that a clear relationship between problem difficulty and optimal token spend exists. We find that in general, reasoning models are poorly calibrated, particularly on easy problems. We introduce THOUGHTTERMINATOR, a training-free black box decoding technique that significantly improves reasoning model calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T22:16:30Z)
• Climbing the Ladder of Reasoning: What LLMs Can-and Still Can't-Solve after SFT? [59.418994222096885]
  We conduct a detailed analysis of model performance on the AIME24 dataset. We categorize questions into four tiers (Easy, Medium, Hard, and Extremely Hard) We find that progression from Easy to Medium tier requires adopting an R1 reasoning style with minimal SFT-1K instances. Exh-level questions present a fundamentally different challenge; they require unconventional problem-solving skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T03:39:38Z)
• Reliable and Efficient Amortized Model-based Evaluation [57.6469531082784]
  The average score across a wide range of benchmarks provides a signal that helps guide the use of language models in practice. A popular attempt to lower the cost is to compute the average score on a subset of the benchmark. This approach often renders an unreliable measure of LM performance because the average score is often confounded with the difficulty of the questions in the benchmark subset. We train a model that predicts question difficulty from its content, enabling a reliable measurement at a fraction of the cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T16:15:02Z)
• Reasoning and Sampling-Augmented MCQ Difficulty Prediction via LLMs [1.749935196721634]
  We propose a novel, two-stage method to predict the difficulty of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) First, to better estimate the complexity of each MCQ, we use large language models (LLMs) to augment the reasoning steps required to reach each option. Second, to capture the plausibility of distractors, we sample knowledge levels from a distribution to account for variation among students responding to the MCQ.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T15:39:43Z)
• Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models for Estimating the Reading Comprehension Question Difficulty [2.335292678914151]
  This study investigates the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in estimating the difficulty of reading comprehension questions. We use OpenAI's GPT-4o and o1, in estimating the difficulty of reading comprehension questions using the Study Aid and Reading Assessment (SARA) dataset. The results indicate that while the models yield difficulty estimates that align meaningfully with derived IRT parameters, there are notable differences in their sensitivity to extreme item characteristics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T02:28:48Z)
• MATH-Perturb: Benchmarking LLMs' Math Reasoning Abilities against Hard Perturbations [90.07275414500154]
  We observe significant performance drops on MATH-P-Hard across various models. We also raise concerns about a novel form of memorization where models blindly apply learned problem-solving skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T13:31:46Z)
• DiverseAgentEntropy: Quantifying Black-Box LLM Uncertainty through Diverse Perspectives and Multi-Agent Interaction [53.803276766404494]
  Existing methods, which gauge a model's uncertainty through evaluating self-consistency in responses to the original query, do not always capture true uncertainty.<n>We propose a novel method, DiverseAgentEntropy, for evaluating a model's uncertainty using multi-agent interaction.<n>Our method offers a more accurate prediction of the model's reliability and further detects hallucinations, outperforming other self-consistency-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T18:52:40Z)
• Machine Unlearning in Forgettability Sequence [22.497699136603877]
  We identify key factor affecting unlearning difficulty and the performance of unlearning algorithms. We propose a general unlearning framework, dubbed RSU, which consists of Ranking module and SeqUnlearn module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T01:12:07Z)
• Can Model Uncertainty Function as a Proxy for Multiple-Choice Question Item Difficulty? [12.638577140117702]
  We leverage an aspect of generative large models which might be seen as a weakness when answering questions. We explore correlations between two different metrics of uncertainty, and the actual student response distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T10:48:04Z)
• Answering from Sure to Uncertain: Uncertainty-Aware Curriculum Learning for Video Question Answering [63.12469700986452]
  We introduce the concept of uncertainty-aware curriculum learning (CL) Here, uncertainty serves as the guiding principle for dynamically adjusting the difficulty. In practice, we seamlessly integrate the VideoQA model into our framework and conduct comprehensive experiments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-03T02:29:34Z)
• Uncertainty-aware Language Modeling for Selective Question Answering [107.47864420630923]
  We present an automatic large language model (LLM) conversion approach that produces uncertainty-aware LLMs. Our approach is model- and data-agnostic, is computationally-efficient, and does not rely on external models or systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-26T22:47:54Z)
• UNK-VQA: A Dataset and a Probe into the Abstention Ability of Multi-modal Large Models [55.22048505787125]
  This paper contributes a comprehensive dataset, called UNK-VQA. We first augment the existing data via deliberate perturbations on either the image or question. We then extensively evaluate the zero- and few-shot performance of several emerging multi-modal large models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T02:38:09Z)
• Exploring Bayesian Deep Learning for Urgent Instructor Intervention Need in MOOC Forums [58.221459787471254]
  Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have become a popular choice for e-learning thanks to their great flexibility. Due to large numbers of learners and their diverse backgrounds, it is taxing to offer real-time support. With the large volume of posts and high workloads for MOOC instructors, it is unlikely that the instructors can identify all learners requiring intervention. This paper explores for the first time Bayesian deep learning on learner-based text posts with two methods: Monte Carlo Dropout and Variational Inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-26T15:12:13Z)
• R2DE: a NLP approach to estimating IRT parameters of newly generated questions [3.364554138758565]
  R2DE is a model capable of assessing newly generated multiple-choice questions by looking at the text of the question. In particular, it can estimate the difficulty and the discrimination of each question.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-21T14:31:01Z)

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.