Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Are You Doubtful? Oh, It Might Be Difficult Then! Exploring the Use of Model Uncertainty for Question Difficulty Estimation

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 2412.11831 v2 pith:6MI3RH75 submitted 2024-12-16 cs.CL

Are You Doubtful? Oh, It Might Be Difficult Then! Exploring the Use of Model Uncertainty for Question Difficulty Estimation

classification cs.CL
keywords difficultymodeluncertaintyfeaturesapproachdatasetsdifferentestimate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In an educational setting, an estimate of the difficulty of multiple-choice questions (MCQs), a commonly used strategy to assess learning progress, constitutes very useful information for both teachers and students. Since human assessment is costly from multiple points of view, automatic approaches to MCQ item difficulty estimation are investigated, yielding however mixed success until now. Our approach to this problem takes a different angle from previous work: asking various Large Language Models to tackle the questions included in three different MCQ datasets, we leverage model uncertainty to estimate item difficulty. By using both model uncertainty features as well as textual features in a Random Forest regressor, we show that uncertainty features contribute substantially to difficulty prediction, where difficulty is inversely proportional to the number of students who can correctly answer a question. In addition to showing the value of our approach, we also observe that our model achieves state-of-the-art results on the USMLE and CMCQRD publicly available datasets.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Cognitive Episodes in LLM Reasoning Traces Enable Interpretable Human Item Difficulty Prediction

    cs.CL 2026-06 conditional novelty 6.5

    Structured cognitive-episode features from LRM reasoning traces, combined with item semantics, improve human item-difficulty prediction and show harder items drive more implementation-centered, iterative solving.

  2. Cognitive Episodes in LLM Reasoning Traces Enable Interpretable Human Item Difficulty Prediction

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Epi2Diff extracts cognitive episode sequences from LRM reasoning traces and combines them with semantic features to predict human item difficulty, outperforming baselines on four educational datasets.

  3. LLMs Struggle to Measure What Distinguishes Students of Different Proficiency Levels: A Study of Item Discrimination in Reading Comprehension Assessment

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LLMs achieve maximum Spearman correlations of 0.152 (direct) and 0.241 (response-based) with human item discrimination values, showing non-random but unreliable signal for distinguishing student proficiency.