REVIEW 1 cited by
Do LLMs Implicitly Determine the Suitable Text Difficulty for Users?
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
Do LLMs Implicitly Determine the Suitable Text Difficulty for Users?
read the original abstract
Education that suits the individual learning level is necessary to improve students' understanding. The first step in achieving this purpose by using large language models (LLMs) is to adjust the textual difficulty of the response to students. This work analyzes how LLMs can implicitly adjust text difficulty between user input and its generated text. To conduct the experiments, we created a new dataset from Stack-Overflow to explore the performance of question-answering-based conversation. Experimental results on the Stack-Overflow dataset and the TSCC dataset, including multi-turn conversation show that LLMs can implicitly handle text difficulty between user input and its generated response. We also observed that some LLMs can surpass humans in handling text difficulty and the importance of instruction-tuning.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Confidence Calibration in Large Language Models
LLMs show average overconfidence moderated by a strong hard-easy effect, quantified across tasks and via the new LifeEval actuarial-probability benchmark.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.