Beyond Agreement: Diagnosing the Rationale Alignment of Automated Essay Scoring Methods based on Linguistically-informed Counterfactuals

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yupei, Hu, Renfen, Zhao, Zhe
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866929530801750016
author Wang, Yupei
Hu, Renfen
Zhao, Zhe
author_facet Wang, Yupei
Hu, Renfen
Zhao, Zhe
contents While current Automated Essay Scoring (AES) methods demonstrate high scoring agreement with human raters, their decision-making mechanisms are not fully understood. Our proposed method, using counterfactual intervention assisted by Large Language Models (LLMs), reveals that BERT-like models primarily focus on sentence-level features, whereas LLMs such as GPT-3.5, GPT-4 and Llama-3 are sensitive to conventions & accuracy, language complexity, and organization, indicating a more comprehensive rationale alignment with scoring rubrics. Moreover, LLMs can discern counterfactual interventions when giving feedback on essays. Our approach improves understanding of neural AES methods and can also apply to other domains seeking transparency in model-driven decisions.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2405_19433
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Beyond Agreement: Diagnosing the Rationale Alignment of Automated Essay Scoring Methods based on Linguistically-informed Counterfactuals
Wang, Yupei
Hu, Renfen
Zhao, Zhe
Computation and Language
While current Automated Essay Scoring (AES) methods demonstrate high scoring agreement with human raters, their decision-making mechanisms are not fully understood. Our proposed method, using counterfactual intervention assisted by Large Language Models (LLMs), reveals that BERT-like models primarily focus on sentence-level features, whereas LLMs such as GPT-3.5, GPT-4 and Llama-3 are sensitive to conventions & accuracy, language complexity, and organization, indicating a more comprehensive rationale alignment with scoring rubrics. Moreover, LLMs can discern counterfactual interventions when giving feedback on essays. Our approach improves understanding of neural AES methods and can also apply to other domains seeking transparency in model-driven decisions.
title Beyond Agreement: Diagnosing the Rationale Alignment of Automated Essay Scoring Methods based on Linguistically-informed Counterfactuals
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.19433