69.3CLJun 4
EDIT: Evidence-Diagnosed Intervention Training for Rule-Faithful LLM GradingZhihao Wu, Linhai Zhang, Taiyi Wang et al.
Reliable rubric grading requires more than accurate score prediction. Each judgement must be grounded in the mark scheme and evidence from the student answer. Existing credit-assignment and intervention methods, primarily designed for self-contained reasoning tasks such as mathematics reasoning, struggle in this setting because they do not identify where grading reasoning goes wrong or how the model's belief about the final mark changes during reasoning. We propose Evidence-Diagnosed Intervention Training (EDIT), a two-phase framework for training more rubric-faithful LLM graders. First, EDIT-SFT locates problematic reasoning steps using internal model signals: posterior belief over the final mark and input-grounding scores. It then revises only these local steps with help from a rubric checklist. Second, EDIT-RL calibrates the grader with belief-guided reward shaping, penalising large harmful belief drifts while still allowing helpful exploration. Experiments on two real-world, multi-subject grading benchmarks demonstrate that EDIT consistently outperforms strong supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning baselines on both in-domain and out-of-domain splits, with ablation studies confirming that internal-state diagnostics drive these gains.
CLFeb 26, 2025Code
Two Heads Are Better Than One: Dual-Model Verbal Reflection at Inference-TimeJiazheng Li, Yuxiang Zhou, Junru Lu et al.
Although preference optimization methods have improved reasoning performance in Large Language Models (LLMs), they often lack transparency regarding why one reasoning outcome is preferred over another. This limitation is especially critical in Automated Student Answer Scoring (ASAS), where explainability is essential to justify assessment outcomes. Verbal reinforcement learning offers the potential to generate explicit reflection, but it tends to produce superficial critiques that can harm assessment performance. Existing LLMs also struggle to reliably detect subtle reasoning errors in ASAS tasks. Moreover, manually identifying intermediate reasoning errors is expensive and difficult to scale. To address these challenges, we introduce a contrastive reflection synthesis pipeline that generates precise verbal feedback by identifying discrepancies in structure reasoning graph paths. Leveraging these synthetic reflection data, we propose DARS, a Dual-model Reflective Scoring framework featuring a dedicated Critic model trained for effective reflection. DARS achieves strong performance and consistently outperforms existing ASAS baselines across all evaluation metrics. Extensive experiments further provide novel insights into the value of reflection data, framework design, and the scaling behavior of DARS. We release the DARS code at https://github.com/lijiazheng99/DARS.
CLJun 28, 2024Code
Calibrating LLMs with Preference Optimization on Thought Trees for Generating Rationale in Science Question ScoringJiazheng Li, Hainiu Xu, Zhaoyue Sun et al.
Generating rationales that justify scoring decisions has been a promising way to facilitate explainability in automated scoring systems. However, existing methods do not match the accuracy of classifier-based methods. Plus, the generated rationales often contain hallucinated information. To address these issues, we propose a novel framework capable of generating more faithful rationales and, more importantly, matching performance with classifier-based black-box scoring systems. We first mimic the human assessment process by querying Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate a thought tree. We then summarise intermediate assessment decisions from each thought tree path for creating synthetic rationale data and rationale preference data. Finally, we utilise the generated synthetic data to calibrate LLMs through a two-step training process: supervised fine-tuning and preference optimization. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our framework achieves a 38% assessment performance improvement in the QWK score compared to prior work while producing higher-quality rationales, as recognised by human evaluators and LLMs. Our work sheds light on the effectiveness of performing preference optimization using synthetic preference data obtained from thought tree paths. Data and code are available at https://github.com/lijiazheng99/thought_tree_assessment.
CLMay 22, 2023Code
Distilling ChatGPT for Explainable Automated Student Answer AssessmentJiazheng Li, Lin Gui, Yuxiang Zhou et al.
Providing explainable and faithful feedback is crucial for automated student answer assessment. In this paper, we introduce a novel framework that explores using ChatGPT, a cutting-edge large language model, for the concurrent tasks of student answer scoring and rationale generation. We identify the appropriate instructions by prompting ChatGPT with different templates to collect the rationales, where inconsistent rationales are refined to align with marking standards. The refined ChatGPT outputs enable us to fine-tune a smaller language model that simultaneously assesses student answers and provides rationales. Extensive experiments on the benchmark dataset show that the proposed method improves the overall QWK score by 11% compared to ChatGPT. Furthermore, our thorough analysis and human evaluation demonstrate that the rationales generated by our proposed method are comparable to those of ChatGPT. Our approach provides a viable solution to achieve explainable automated assessment in education. Code available at https://github.com/lijiazheng99/aera.
CLDec 17, 2024
An Automated Explainable Educational Assessment System Built on LLMsJiazheng Li, Artem Bobrov, David West et al.
In this demo, we present AERA Chat, an automated and explainable educational assessment system designed for interactive and visual evaluations of student responses. This system leverages large language models (LLMs) to generate automated marking and rationale explanations, addressing the challenge of limited explainability in automated educational assessment and the high costs associated with annotation. Our system allows users to input questions and student answers, providing educators and researchers with insights into assessment accuracy and the quality of LLM-assessed rationales. Additionally, it offers advanced visualization and robust evaluation tools, enhancing the usability for educational assessment and facilitating efficient rationale verification. Our demo video can be found at https://youtu.be/qUSjz-sxlBc.
CYJul 6, 2025
LearnLens: LLM-Enabled Personalised, Curriculum-Grounded Feedback with Educators in the LoopRuncong Zhao, Artem Bobrov, Jiazheng Li et al.
Effective feedback is essential for student learning but is time-intensive for teachers. We present LearnLens, a modular, LLM-based system that generates personalised, curriculum-aligned feedback in science education. LearnLens comprises three components: (1) an error-aware assessment module that captures nuanced reasoning errors; (2) a curriculum-grounded generation module that uses a structured, topic-linked memory chain rather than traditional similarity-based retrieval, improving relevance and reducing noise; and (3) an educator-in-the-loop interface for customisation and oversight. LearnLens addresses key challenges in existing systems, offering scalable, high-quality feedback that empowers both teachers and students.
CLOct 12, 2024
AERA Chat: An Interactive Platform for Automated Explainable Student Answer AssessmentJiazheng Li, Artem Bobrov, Runcong Zhao et al.
Explainability in automated student answer scoring systems is critical for building trust and enhancing usability among educators. Yet, generating high-quality assessment rationales remains challenging due to the scarcity of annotated data and the prohibitive cost of manual verification, prompting heavy reliance on rationales produced by large language models (LLMs), which are often noisy and unreliable. To address these limitations, we present AERA Chat, an interactive visualization platform designed for automated explainable student answer assessment. AERA Chat leverages multiple LLMs to concurrently score student answers and generate explanatory rationales, offering innovative visualization features that highlight critical answer components and rationale justifications. The platform also incorporates intuitive annotation and evaluation tools, supporting educators in marking tasks and researchers in evaluating rationale quality from different models. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our platform through evaluations of multiple rationale-generation methods on several datasets, showcasing its capability for facilitating robust rationale evaluation and comparative analysis.