Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Pushing on Text Readability Assessment: A Transformer Meets Handcrafted Linguistic Features

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.12258 v2 pith:QY742VBW submitted 2021-09-25 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords featureshandcraftedassessmentmodelsreadabilityaccuracydatasetshybrid
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We report two essential improvements in readability assessment: 1. three novel features in advanced semantics and 2. the timely evidence that traditional ML models (e.g. Random Forest, using handcrafted features) can combine with transformers (e.g. RoBERTa) to augment model performance. First, we explore suitable transformers and traditional ML models. Then, we extract 255 handcrafted linguistic features using self-developed extraction software. Finally, we assemble those to create several hybrid models, achieving state-of-the-art (SOTA) accuracy on popular datasets in readability assessment. The use of handcrafted features help model performance on smaller datasets. Notably, our RoBERTA-RF-T1 hybrid achieves the near-perfect classification accuracy of 99%, a 20.3% increase from the previous SOTA.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. What Differentiates Educational Literature? A Multimodal Fusion Approach of Transformers and Computational Linguistics

    cs.CL 2024-11 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A multimodal model (ELECTRA plus a linguistic-feature network) reportedly classifies literature into UK Key Stages with F1 0.996, though the evaluation split may leak book-level information.

Pith tools