Leveraging Generative AI for Enhancing Automated Assessment in Programming Education Contests

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.05990v1
• Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2025 11:20:04 GMT
• Title: Leveraging Generative AI for Enhancing Automated Assessment in Programming Education Contests
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces an innovative NLP-driven method leveraging generative AI (large language models) to automate the creation of high-quality test cases for competitive programming assessments.<n>Our results demonstrate that AI-generated test cases substantially enhanced assessments, notably identifying previously undetected errors in 67% of the OJI 5th grade programming problems.<n>By openly sharing our prompts, translated datasets, and methodologies, we offer practical NLP-based tools that educators and contest organizers can readily integrate to enhance assessment quality, reduce workload, and deepen insights into learner performance.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Competitive programming contests play a crucial role in cultivating computational thinking and algorithmic skills among learners. However, generating comprehensive test cases to effectively assess programming solutions remains resource-intensive and challenging for educators. This paper introduces an innovative NLP-driven method leveraging generative AI (large language models) to automate the creation of high-quality test cases for competitive programming assessments. We extensively evaluated our approach on diverse datasets, including 25 years of Romanian Informatics Olympiad (OJI) data for 5th graders, recent competitions hosted on the Kilonova.ro platform, and the International Informatics Olympiad in Teams (IIOT). Our results demonstrate that AI-generated test cases substantially enhanced assessments, notably identifying previously undetected errors in 67% of the OJI 5th grade programming problems. These improvements underscore the complementary educational value of our technique in formative assessment contexts. By openly sharing our prompts, translated datasets, and methodologies, we offer practical NLP-based tools that educators and contest organizers can readily integrate to enhance assessment quality, reduce workload, and deepen insights into learner performance.

Related papers

• A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for AI-Assisted Scoring in Large-Scale Writing Assessment [0.0]
  This study presents the design and validation of an AI-assisted scoring framework for written responses in a large-scale national assessment.<n>The proposed approach focuses on short written texts of approximately 150-200 words and incorporates a human-in-the-loop strategy to preserve assessment quality while reducing manual workload.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-04T13:47:29Z)
• Revisiting the Performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Introductory Object-Oriented Programming Assessments: Insights from 2026 [0.0]
  This study evaluates five widely used GenAI systems, ChatGPT-5.2, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and M365 Copilot, using programming tests and examination tasks from an introductory university OOP course.<n>All evaluated GenAI systems achieved higher scores than the average student cohort and frequently obtained full marks on longer programming tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-17T09:24:28Z)
• AutoMalDesc: Large-Scale Script Analysis for Cyber Threat Research [81.04845910798387]
  Generating natural language explanations for threat detections remains an open problem in cybersecurity research.<n>We present AutoMalDesc, an automated static analysis summarization framework that operates independently at scale.<n>We publish our complete dataset of more than 100K script samples, including annotated seed (0.9K) datasets, along with our methodology and evaluation framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-17T13:05:25Z)
• A Survey on Feedback Types in Automated Programming Assessment Systems [3.9845307287664973]
  This study investigates how different feedback mechanisms in APASs are perceived by students, and how effective they are in supporting problem-solving.<n>Results indicate that while students rate unit test feedback as the most helpful, AI-generated feedback leads to significantly better performances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T09:08:22Z)
• Foundational Automatic Evaluators: Scaling Multi-Task Generative Evaluator Training for Reasoning-Centric Domains [97.5573252172065]
  We train a family of Automatic Reasoning Evaluators (FARE) with a simple iterative rejection-sampling supervised finetuning approach.<n>FARE-8B challenges larger specialized RL-trained evaluators and FARE-20B sets the new standard for open-source evaluators.<n>As inference-time rerankers, FARE-20B achieves near-oracle performance on MATH.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-20T17:52:06Z)
• Assessing the Quality of AI-Generated Exams: A Large-Scale Field Study [18.104664166381877]
  Large language models (LLMs) challenge conventional methods of teaching and learning.<n>One promising application is the generation of customized exams, tailored to specific course content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-09T01:20:53Z)
• The AI Imperative: Scaling High-Quality Peer Review in Machine Learning [49.87236114682497]
  We argue that AI-assisted peer review must become an urgent research and infrastructure priority.<n>We propose specific roles for AI in enhancing factual verification, guiding reviewer performance, assisting authors in quality improvement, and supporting ACs in decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T18:37:14Z)
• From Struggle (06-2024) to Mastery (02-2025) LLMs Conquer Advanced Algorithm Exams and Pave the Way for Editorial Generation [0.0]
  This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) on challenging university-level algorithms exams.<n>By testing multiple models on both a Romanian exam and its high-quality English translation, we analyze LLMs' problem-solving capabilities, consistency, and multilingual performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T12:41:20Z)
• Does Machine Unlearning Truly Remove Model Knowledge? A Framework for Auditing Unlearning in LLMs [58.24692529185971]
  We introduce a comprehensive auditing framework for unlearning evaluation comprising three benchmark datasets, six unlearning algorithms, and five prompt-based auditing methods.<n>We evaluate the effectiveness and robustness of different unlearning strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T09:19:07Z)
• ProBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models in Competitive Programming [44.09445715541973]
  We propose ProBench to benchmark large language models (LLMs) in competitive programming.<n>ProBench collects a comprehensive set of competitive programming problems from Codeforces, Luogu, and Nowcoder platforms.<n>We assess 9 latest LLMs in competitive programming across multiple dimensions, including thought chain analysis, error type diagnosis, and reasoning depth evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T09:12:42Z)
• A Novel Psychometrics-Based Approach to Developing Professional Competency Benchmark for Large Language Models [0.0]
  We propose a comprehensive approach to benchmark development based on rigorous psychometric principles. We make the first attempt to illustrate this approach by creating a new benchmark in the field of pedagogy and education. We construct a novel benchmark guided by the Bloom's taxonomy and rigorously designed by a consortium of education experts trained in test development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T19:32:43Z)
• SIaM: Self-Improving Code-Assisted Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models [54.78329741186446]
  We propose a novel paradigm that uses a code-based critic model to guide steps including question-code data construction, quality control, and complementary evaluation. Experiments across both in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks in English and Chinese demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T06:33:03Z)
• Could ChatGPT get an Engineering Degree? Evaluating Higher Education Vulnerability to AI Assistants [176.39275404745098]
  We evaluate whether two AI assistants, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, can adequately answer assessment questions.<n>GPT-4 answers an average of 65.8% of questions correctly, and can even produce the correct answer across at least one prompting strategy for 85.1% of questions.<n>Our results call for revising program-level assessment design in higher education in light of advances in generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T12:11:49Z)
• Are we making progress in unlearning? Findings from the first NeurIPS unlearning competition [70.60872754129832]
  First NeurIPS competition on unlearning sought to stimulate the development of novel algorithms. Nearly 1,200 teams from across the world participated. We analyze top solutions and delve into discussions on benchmarking unlearning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T12:58:00Z)
• Text Quality-Based Pruning for Efficient Training of Language Models [66.66259229732121]
  We propose a novel method for numerically evaluating text quality in large unlabelled NLP datasets. By proposing the text quality metric, the paper establishes a framework to identify and eliminate low-quality text instances. Experimental results over multiple models and datasets demonstrate the efficacy of this approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-26T18:01:25Z)
• Evaluating the Generation Capabilities of Large Chinese Language Models [27.598864484231477]
  This paper unveils CG-Eval, the first-ever comprehensive and automated evaluation framework. It assesses the generative capabilities of large Chinese language models across a spectrum of academic disciplines. Gscore automates the quality measurement of a model's text generation against reference standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-09T09:22:56Z)
• Modelling Assessment Rubrics through Bayesian Networks: a Pragmatic Approach [40.06500618820166]
  This paper presents an approach to deriving a learner model directly from an assessment rubric. We illustrate how the approach can be applied to automatize the human assessment of an activity developed for testing computational thinking skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-07T10:09:12Z)

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.