LLM-based Automated Grading with Human-in-the-Loop

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.05239v2
• Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 03:05:07 GMT
• Title: LLM-based Automated Grading with Human-in-the-Loop
• Authors: Hang Li, Yucheng Chu, Kaiqi Yang, Yasemin Copur-Gencturk, Jiliang Tang,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used for automatic short answer grading (ASAG)<n>In this work, we explore the potential of LLMs in ASAG tasks by leveraging their interactive capabilities through a human-in-the-loop (HITL) approach.<n>Our proposed framework, GradeHITL, utilizes the generative properties of LLMs to pose questions to human experts, incorporating their insights to refine grading rubrics dynamically.
• Score: 32.14015215819979
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly large language models (LLMs), has brought significant advancements to the field of education. Among various applications, automatic short answer grading (ASAG), which focuses on evaluating open-ended textual responses, has seen remarkable progress with the introduction of LLMs. These models not only enhance grading performance compared to traditional ASAG approaches but also move beyond simple comparisons with predefined "golden" answers, enabling more sophisticated grading scenarios, such as rubric-based evaluation. However, existing LLM-powered methods still face challenges in achieving human-level grading performance in rubric-based assessments due to their reliance on fully automated approaches. In this work, we explore the potential of LLMs in ASAG tasks by leveraging their interactive capabilities through a human-in-the-loop (HITL) approach. Our proposed framework, GradeHITL, utilizes the generative properties of LLMs to pose questions to human experts, incorporating their insights to refine grading rubrics dynamically. This adaptive process significantly improves grading accuracy, outperforming existing methods and bringing ASAG closer to human-level evaluation.

Related papers

• Enhancing LLM-Based Short Answer Grading with Retrieval-Augmented Generation [32.12573291200363]
  Large language models (LLMs) possess human-like ability in linguistic tasks.<n>Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) emerges as a promising solution.<n>We propose an adaptive RAG framework for automated grading.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T17:17:41Z)
• Process-based Self-Rewarding Language Models [47.119444722849025]
  Large Language Models have demonstrated outstanding performance across various downstream tasks and have been widely applied in multiple scenarios. Human-annotated preference data is used for training to further improve LLMs' performance, which is constrained by the upper limit of human performance. We propose the Process-based Self-Rewarding pipeline for language models, which introduces long-thought reasoning, step-wise LLM-as-a-Judge, and step-wise preference optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-05T18:58:44Z)
• PanguIR Technical Report for NTCIR-18 AEOLLM Task [12.061652026366591]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly critical and challenging to evaluate.<n>Manual evaluation, while comprehensive, is often costly and resource-intensive.<n>automatic evaluation offers greater scalability but is constrained by the limitations of its evaluation criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T07:40:02Z)
• MME-Survey: A Comprehensive Survey on Evaluation of Multimodal LLMs [97.94579295913606]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have garnered increased attention from both industry and academia.<n>In the development process, evaluation is critical since it provides intuitive feedback and guidance on improving models.<n>This work aims to offer researchers an easy grasp of how to effectively evaluate MLLMs according to different needs and to inspire better evaluation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-22T18:59:54Z)
• From Novice to Expert: LLM Agent Policy Optimization via Step-wise Reinforcement Learning [62.54484062185869]
  We introduce StepAgent, which utilizes step-wise reward to optimize the agent's reinforcement learning process.<n>We propose implicit-reward and inverse reinforcement learning techniques to facilitate agent reflection and policy adjustment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T10:35:11Z)
• A LLM-Powered Automatic Grading Framework with Human-Level Guidelines Optimization [31.722907135361492]
  Open-ended short-answer questions (SAGs) have been widely recognized as a powerful tool for providing deeper insights into learners' responses in the context of learning analytics (LA) SAGs often present challenges in practice due to the high grading workload and concerns about inconsistent assessments. We propose a unified multi-agent ASAG framework, GradeOpt, which leverages large language models (LLMs) as graders for SAGs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T03:11:24Z)
• Aligning with Human Judgement: The Role of Pairwise Preference in Large Language Model Evaluators [48.54465599914978]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising capabilities as automatic evaluators in assessing the quality of generated natural language.<n>LLMs still exhibit biases in evaluation and often struggle to generate coherent evaluations that align with human assessments.<n>We introduce Pairwise-preference Search (PAIRS), an uncertainty-guided search-based rank aggregation method that employs LLMs to conduct pairwise comparisons locally and efficiently ranks candidate texts globally.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T17:11:28Z)
• Inadequacies of Large Language Model Benchmarks in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence [5.147767778946168]
  We critically assess 23 state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) benchmarks. Our research uncovered significant limitations, including biases, difficulties in measuring genuine reasoning, adaptability, implementation inconsistencies, prompt engineering complexity, diversity, and the overlooking of cultural and ideological norms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T11:08:10Z)
• Human-AI Collaborative Essay Scoring: A Dual-Process Framework with LLMs [13.262711792955377]
  This study explores the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) for automated essay scoring. We propose an open-source LLM-based AES system, inspired by the dual-process theory. We find that our system not only automates the grading process but also enhances the performance and efficiency of human graders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T07:50:10Z)
• MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
  We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation. By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
  We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
• Aligning Large Language Models with Human: A Survey [53.6014921995006]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) trained on extensive textual corpora have emerged as leading solutions for a broad array of Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. Despite their notable performance, these models are prone to certain limitations such as misunderstanding human instructions, generating potentially biased content, or factually incorrect information. This survey presents a comprehensive overview of these alignment technologies, including the following aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-24T17:44:58Z)

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.