Text-Based Approaches to Item Difficulty Modeling in Large-Scale Assessments: A Systematic Review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23486v1
• Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 20:19:39 GMT
• Title: Text-Based Approaches to Item Difficulty Modeling in Large-Scale Assessments: A Systematic Review
• Abstract summary: Item difficulty plays a crucial role in test performance, interpretability of scores, and equity for all test-takers, especially in large-scale assessments.<n>Traditional approaches to item difficulty modeling rely on field testing and classical test theory (CTT)-based item analysis or item response theory (IRT) calibration.<n>This paper reviews and synthesizes 37 articles on automated item difficulty prediction in large-scale assessment settings published through May 2025.
• Score: 18.045716459188366
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Item difficulty plays a crucial role in test performance, interpretability of scores, and equity for all test-takers, especially in large-scale assessments. Traditional approaches to item difficulty modeling rely on field testing and classical test theory (CTT)-based item analysis or item response theory (IRT) calibration, which can be time-consuming and costly. To overcome these challenges, text-based approaches leveraging machine learning and language models, have emerged as promising alternatives. This paper reviews and synthesizes 37 articles on automated item difficulty prediction in large-scale assessment settings published through May 2025. For each study, we delineate the dataset, difficulty parameter, subject domain, item type, number of items, training and test data split, input, features, model, evaluation criteria, and model performance outcomes. Results showed that although classic machine learning models remain relevant due to their interpretability, state-of-the-art language models, using both small and large transformer-based architectures, can capture syntactic and semantic patterns without the need for manual feature engineering. Uniquely, model performance outcomes were summarized to serve as a benchmark for future research and overall, text-based methods have the potential to predict item difficulty with root mean square error (RMSE) as low as 0.165, Pearson correlation as high as 0.87, and accuracy as high as 0.806. The review concludes by discussing implications for practice and outlining future research directions for automated item difficulty modeling.

Related papers

• Reconstructing Item Characteristic Curves using Fine-Tuned Large Language Models [0.0]
  This study introduces a novel approach that implicitly models Item Response Theory (IRT) psychometric properties.<n>We train models to generate responses to multiple choice questions conditioned on discrete ability descriptors.<n>We reconstruct the probability of a correct response as a function of student ability, effectively generating synthetic Item Characteristic Curves (ICCs) to estimate IRT parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-05T22:11:41Z)
• Large Language Models for Full-Text Methods Assessment: A Case Study on Mediation Analysis [15.98124151893659]
  Large language models (LLMs) offer potential for automating methodological assessments.<n>We benchmarked state-of-the-art LLMs against expert human reviewers across 180 full-text scientific articles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-12T19:04:22Z)
• Grounding Synthetic Data Evaluations of Language Models in Unsupervised Document Corpora [9.871701356351542]
  Language Models (LMs) continue to advance, improving response quality and coherence.<n>A plethora of evaluation benchmarks have been constructed to assess model quality, response appropriateness, and reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose a methodology for automating the construction of fact-based synthetic data model evaluations grounded in document populations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T18:50:03Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Critique Models with Test-Time and Training-Time Supervision [120.40788744292739]
  We propose a two-player paradigm that separates the roles of reasoning and critique models. We first propose AutoMathCritique, an automated and scalable framework for collecting critique data. We demonstrate that the critique models consistently improve the actor's performance on difficult queries at test-time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T17:11:54Z)
• How Hard is this Test Set? NLI Characterization by Exploiting Training Dynamics [49.9329723199239]
  We propose a method for the automated creation of a challenging test set without relying on the manual construction of artificial and unrealistic examples. We categorize the test set of popular NLI datasets into three difficulty levels by leveraging methods that exploit training dynamics. When our characterization method is applied to the training set, models trained with only a fraction of the data achieve comparable performance to those trained on the full dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T13:39:21Z)
• Scalable Learning of Item Response Theory Models [48.91265296134559]
  Item Response Theory (IRT) models aim to assess latent abilities of $n$ examinees along with latent difficulty characteristics of $m$ test items from categorical data. We leverage the similarity of these models to logistic regression, which can be approximated accurately using small weighted subsets called coresets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-01T17:12:53Z)
• Split and Rephrase with Large Language Models [2.499907423888049]
  Split and Rephrase (SPRP) task consists in splitting complex sentences into a sequence of shorter grammatical sentences. We evaluate large language models on the task, showing that they can provide large improvements over the state of the art on the main metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T10:16:37Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• Extensive Evaluation of Transformer-based Architectures for Adverse Drug Events Extraction [6.78974856327994]
  Adverse Event (ADE) extraction is one of the core tasks in digital pharmacovigilance. We evaluate 19 Transformer-based models for ADE extraction on informal texts. At the end of our analyses, we identify a list of take-home messages that can be derived from the experimental data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T15:25:24Z)
• Preserving Knowledge Invariance: Rethinking Robustness Evaluation of Open Information Extraction [49.15931834209624]
  We present the first benchmark that simulates the evaluation of open information extraction models in the real world.<n>We design and annotate a large-scale testbed in which each example is a knowledge-invariant clique.<n>By further elaborating the robustness metric, a model is judged to be robust if its performance is consistently accurate on the overall cliques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T12:05:09Z)
• Evaluation of Categorical Generative Models -- Bridging the Gap Between Real and Synthetic Data [18.142397311464343]
  We introduce an appropriately scalable evaluation method for generative models. We consider increasingly large probability spaces, which correspond to increasingly difficult modeling tasks. We validate our evaluation procedure with synthetic experiments on both synthetic generative models and current state-of-the-art categorical generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-28T21:05:25Z)
• AES Systems Are Both Overstable And Oversensitive: Explaining Why And Proposing Defenses [66.49753193098356]
  We investigate the reason behind the surprising adversarial brittleness of scoring models. Our results indicate that autoscoring models, despite getting trained as "end-to-end" models, behave like bag-of-words models. We propose detection-based protection models that can detect oversensitivity and overstability causing samples with high accuracies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T03:49:38Z)
• Evaluation Toolkit For Robustness Testing Of Automatic Essay Scoring Systems [64.4896118325552]
  We evaluate the current state-of-the-art AES models using a model adversarial evaluation scheme and associated metrics. We find that AES models are highly overstable. Even heavy modifications(as much as 25%) with content unrelated to the topic of the questions do not decrease the score produced by the models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-14T03:49:43Z)

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.