REVIEW 2 cited by
Rationale Behind Essay Scores: Enhancing S-LLM's Multi-Trait Essay Scoring with Rationale Generated by LLMs
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
read the original abstract
Existing automated essay scoring (AES) has solely relied on essay text without using explanatory rationales for the scores, thereby forgoing an opportunity to capture the specific aspects evaluated by rubric indicators in a fine-grained manner. This paper introduces Rationale-based Multiple Trait Scoring (RMTS), a novel approach for multi-trait essay scoring that integrates prompt-engineering-based large language models (LLMs) with a fine-tuning-based essay scoring model using a smaller large language model (S-LLM). RMTS uses an LLM-based trait-wise rationale generation system where a separate LLM agent generates trait-specific rationales based on rubric guidelines, which the scoring model uses to accurately predict multi-trait scores. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets, including ASAP, ASAP++, and Feedback Prize, show that RMTS significantly outperforms state-of-the-art models and vanilla S-LLMs in trait-specific scoring. By assisting quantitative assessment with fine-grained qualitative rationales, RMTS enhances the trait-wise reliability, providing partial explanations about essays. The code is available at https://github.com/BBeeChu/RMTS.git.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
WrAFT: a Modularized Automated Writing Evaluation System for Argumentative Essays
WrAFT, a modular LLM system, scores TOEFL essays with QWK 0.84/RMSE 0.44 and generates surface and deep feedback that human raters approve 93-96% of the time.
-
Agreement Between Large Language Models and Human Raters in Essay Scoring: A Research Synthesis
Across 65 studies, LLM-human essay-score agreement mostly falls between 0.30 and 0.80, but the spread is wide, reporting is heterogeneous, and no pooled estimate is given.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.