Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Human-AI Collaborative Essay Scoring: A Dual-Process Framework with 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

arxiv 2401.06431 v2 pith:XEP63FEV submitted 2024-01-12 cs.CL cs.AI

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

Receiving timely and personalized feedback is essential for second-language learners, especially when human instructors are unavailable. This study explores the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs), including both proprietary and open-source models, for Automated Essay Scoring (AES). Through extensive experiments with public and private datasets, we find that while LLMs do not surpass conventional state-of-the-art (SOTA) grading models in performance, they exhibit notable consistency, generalizability, and explainability. We propose an open-source LLM-based AES system, inspired by the dual-process theory. Our system offers accurate grading and high-quality feedback, at least comparable to that of fine-tuned proprietary LLMs, in addition to its ability to alleviate misgrading. Furthermore, we conduct human-AI co-grading experiments with both novice and expert graders. We find that our system not only automates the grading process but also enhances the performance and efficiency of human graders, particularly for essays where the model has lower confidence. These results highlight the potential of LLMs to facilitate effective human-AI collaboration in the educational context, potentially transforming learning experiences through AI-generated feedback.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Beyond Score Prediction: LLM-Based Essay Scoring and Feedback Generation via Reinforcement Learning with Rubric Rewards

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RLAES-AGFO trains an LLM with GRPO and an LLM-judged 166-item feedback rubric, reaching QWK 0.803 on ASAP while generating feedback rated as well as GPT-5.5.

  2. Investigating first-language bias in LLM-based automated essay scoring: A cross-prompt evaluation of an open-weight AI-model on TOEFL essays

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A Gemma-3 essay scorer trained on 480 essays generalizes across eight unseen TOEFL11 prompts but shows a consistent within-band scoring offset favoring European-language over East-Asian-language writers.

  3. Not All Jokes Land: Evaluating Large Language Models Understanding of Workplace Humor

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Five LLMs frequently misclassify the appropriateness of workplace humor, especially offensive and neutral jokes, on a new 304-item industrial humor dataset.

  4. CAFES: A Collaborative Multi-Agent Framework for Multi-Granular Multimodal Essay Scoring

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A student-teacher multi-agent pipeline with positive-only feedback improves QWK agreement with human essay scores by 21% on a multimodal benchmark, with gains concentrated in traits where baselines were weakest.

Pith tools