Enhancing Essay Cohesion Assessment: A Novel Item Response Theory Approach

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.08487v1
• Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 11:05:27 GMT
• Title: Enhancing Essay Cohesion Assessment: A Novel Item Response Theory Approach
• Authors: Bruno Alexandre Rosa, Hilário Oliveira, Luiz Rodrigues, Eduardo Araujo Oliveira, Rafael Ferreira Mello,
• Abstract summary: This work proposes and analyses the performance of a cohesion score prediction approach based on item response theory.<n>The proposed approach outperforms conventional machine learning models and ensemble methods in several evaluation metrics.
• Score: 0.7845950813414773
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Essays are considered a valuable mechanism for evaluating learning outcomes in writing. Textual cohesion is an essential characteristic of a text, as it facilitates the establishment of meaning between its parts. Automatically scoring cohesion in essays presents a challenge in the field of educational artificial intelligence. The machine learning algorithms used to evaluate texts generally do not consider the individual characteristics of the instances that comprise the analysed corpus. In this meaning, item response theory can be adapted to the context of machine learning, characterising the ability, difficulty and discrimination of the models used. This work proposes and analyses the performance of a cohesion score prediction approach based on item response theory to adjust the scores generated by machine learning models. In this study, the corpus selected for the experiments consisted of the extended Essay-BR, which includes 6,563 essays in the style of the National High School Exam (ENEM), and the Brazilian Portuguese Narrative Essays, comprising 1,235 essays written by 5th to 9th grade students from public schools. We extracted 325 linguistic features and treated the problem as a machine learning regression task. The experimental results indicate that the proposed approach outperforms conventional machine learning models and ensemble methods in several evaluation metrics. This research explores a potential approach for improving the automatic evaluation of cohesion in educational essays.

Related papers

• Machine vs Machine: Using AI to Tackle Generative AI Threats in Assessment [0.0]
  This paper presents a theoretical framework for addressing the challenges posed by generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education assessment.<n>Large language models like GPT-4, Claude, and Llama increasingly demonstrate the ability to produce sophisticated academic content.<n>Surveys indicate 74-92% of students experimenting with these tools for academic purposes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-31T22:29:43Z)
• NLP and Education: using semantic similarity to evaluate filled gaps in a large-scale Cloze test in the classroom [0.0]
  Using data from Cloze tests administered to students in Brazil, WE models for Brazilian Portuguese (PT-BR) were employed to measure semantic similarity. A comparative analysis between the WE models' scores and the judges' evaluations revealed that GloVe was the most effective model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T15:22:26Z)
• STRICTA: Structured Reasoning in Critical Text Assessment for Peer Review and Beyond [68.47402386668846]
  We introduce Structured Reasoning In Critical Text Assessment (STRICTA) to model text assessment as an explicit, step-wise reasoning process.<n>STRICTA breaks down the assessment into a graph of interconnected reasoning steps drawing on causality theory.<n>We apply STRICTA to a dataset of over 4000 reasoning steps from roughly 40 biomedical experts on more than 20 papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T06:55:37Z)
• ElicitationGPT: Text Elicitation Mechanisms via Language Models [12.945581341789431]
  This paper develops mechanisms for scoring elicited text against ground truth text using domain-knowledge-free queries to a large language model. An empirical evaluation is conducted on peer reviews from a peer-grading dataset and in comparison to manual instructor scores for the peer reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T17:49:10Z)
• Multi-Dimensional Evaluation of Text Summarization with In-Context Learning [79.02280189976562]
  In this paper, we study the efficacy of large language models as multi-dimensional evaluators using in-context learning. Our experiments show that in-context learning-based evaluators are competitive with learned evaluation frameworks for the task of text summarization. We then analyze the effects of factors such as the selection and number of in-context examples on performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T23:27:49Z)
• Large Language Models are Diverse Role-Players for Summarization Evaluation [82.31575622685902]
  A document summary's quality can be assessed by human annotators on various criteria, both objective ones like grammar and correctness, and subjective ones like informativeness, succinctness, and appeal. Most of the automatic evaluation methods like BLUE/ROUGE may be not able to adequately capture the above dimensions. We propose a new evaluation framework based on LLMs, which provides a comprehensive evaluation framework by comparing generated text and reference text from both objective and subjective aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-27T10:40:59Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Analyzing and Evaluating Faithfulness in Dialogue Summarization [67.07947198421421]
  We first perform the fine-grained human analysis on the faithfulness of dialogue summaries and observe that over 35% of generated summaries are faithfully inconsistent respective the source dialogues. We present a new model-level faithfulness evaluation method. It examines generation models with multi-choice questions created by rule-based transformations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-21T07:22:43Z)
• Text similarity analysis for evaluation of descriptive answers [0.0]
  This paper proposes a text analysis based automated approach for automatic evaluation of the descriptive answers in an examination. In this architecture, the examiner creates a sample answer sheet for given sets of question. By using the concept of text summarization, text semantics and keywords summarization, the final score for each answer is calculated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-06T20:19:58Z)
• Salience Estimation with Multi-Attention Learning for Abstractive Text Summarization [86.45110800123216]
  In the task of text summarization, salience estimation for words, phrases or sentences is a critical component. We propose a Multi-Attention Learning framework which contains two new attention learning components for salience estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-07T02:38:56Z)

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.