Namsoo Shin

Yucheng Chu, Haoyu Han, Shen Dong et al.

Automated short answer grading (ASAG) is critical for scaling educational assessment, yet large language models (LLMs) often struggle with hallucinations and strict rubric adherence due to their reliance on generalized pre-training. While Rretrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) mitigates these issues, standard "flat" vector retrieval mechanisms treat knowledge as isolated fragments, failing to capture the structural relationships and multi-hop reasoning essential for complex educational content. To address this limitation, we introduce a Graph Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) framework that organizes reference materials into a structured knowledge graph to explicitly model dependencies between concepts. Our methodology employs a dual-phase pipeline: utilizing Microsoft GraphRAG for high-fidelity graph construction and the HippoRAG neurosymbolic algorithm to execute associative graph traversals, thereby retrieving comprehensive, connected subgraphs of evidence. Experimental evaluations on a Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) dataset demonstrate that this structural approach significantly outperforms standard RAG baselines across all metrics. Notably, the HippoRAG implementation achieved substantial improvements in evaluating Science and Engineering Practices (SEP), confirming the superiority of structural retrieval in verifying the logical reasoning chains required for higher-order academic assessment.

Hang Li, Kaiqi Yang, Xianxuan Long et al.

The rapid rise of large language models (LLMs) is reshaping the landscape of automatic assessment in education. While these systems demonstrate substantial advantages in adaptability to diverse question types and flexibility in output formats, they also introduce new challenges related to output uncertainty, stemming from the inherently probabilistic nature of LLMs. Output uncertainty is an inescapable challenge in automatic assessment, as assessment results often play a critical role in informing subsequent pedagogical actions, such as providing feedback to students or guiding instructional decisions. Unreliable or poorly calibrated uncertainty estimates can lead to unstable downstream interventions, potentially disrupting students' learning processes and resulting in unintended negative consequences. To systematically understand this challenge and inform future research, we benchmark a broad range of uncertainty quantification methods in the context of LLM-based automatic assessment. Although the effectiveness of these methods has been demonstrated in many tasks across other domains, their applicability and reliability in educational settings, particularly for automatic grading, remain underexplored. Through comprehensive analyses of uncertainty behaviors across multiple assessment datasets, LLM families, and generation control settings, we characterize the uncertainty patterns exhibited by LLMs in grading scenarios. Based on these findings, we evaluate the strengths and limitations of different uncertainty metrics and analyze the influence of key factors, including model families, assessment tasks, and decoding strategies, on uncertainty estimates. Our study provides actionable insights into the characteristics of uncertainty in LLM-based automatic assessment and lays the groundwork for developing more reliable and effective uncertainty-aware grading systems in the future.

Yucheng Chu, Hang Li, Kaiqi Yang et al.

Accurate and unambiguous guidelines are critical for large language model (LLM) based graders, yet manually crafting these prompts is often sub-optimal as LLMs can misinterpret expert guidelines or lack necessary domain specificity. Consequently, the field has moved toward automated prompt optimization to refine grading guidelines without the burden of manual trial and error. However, existing frameworks typically aggregate independent and unstructured error samples into a single update step, resulting in "rule dilution" where conflicting constraints weaken the model's grading logic. To address these limitations, we introduce Confusion-Aware Rubric Optimization (CARO), a novel framework that enhances accuracy and computational efficiency by structurally separating error signals. CARO leverages the confusion matrix to decompose monolithic error signals into distinct modes, allowing for the diagnosis and repair of specific misclassification patterns individually. By synthesizing targeted "fixing patches" for dominant error modes and employing a diversity-aware selection mechanism, the framework prevents guidance conflict and eliminates the need for resource-heavy nested refinement loops. Empirical evaluations on teacher education and STEM datasets demonstrate that CARO significantly outperforms existing SOTA methods. These results suggest that replacing mixed-error aggregation with surgical, mode-specific repair yields robust improvements in automated assessment scalability and precision.