Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21013 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866913812430454784 |
|---|---|
| author | Yaacoub, Antoun Assaghir, Zainab Prevost, Lionel Da-Rugna, Jérôme |
| author_facet | Yaacoub, Antoun Assaghir, Zainab Prevost, Lionel Da-Rugna, Jérôme |
| contents | Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated feedback in educational settings has garnered considerable attention due to its potential to enhance learning outcomes. However, a comprehensive understanding of the linguistic characteristics of AI-generated feedback, including readability, lexical richness, and adaptability across varying challenge levels, remains limited. This study delves into the linguistic and structural attributes of feedback generated by Google's Gemini 1.5-flash text model for computer science multiple-choice questions (MCQs). A dataset of over 1,200 MCQs was analyzed, considering three difficulty levels (easy, medium, hard) and three feedback tones (supportive, neutral, challenging). Key linguistic metrics, such as length, readability scores (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level), vocabulary richness, and lexical density, were computed and examined. A fine-tuned RoBERTa-based multi-task learning (MTL) model was trained to predict these linguistic properties, achieving a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 2.0 for readability and 0.03 for vocabulary richness. The findings reveal significant interaction effects between feedback tone and question difficulty, demonstrating the dynamic adaptation of AI-generated feedback within diverse educational contexts. These insights contribute to the development of more personalized and effective AI-driven feedback mechanisms, highlighting the potential for improved learning outcomes while underscoring the importance of ethical considerations in their design and deployment. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2504_21013 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Analyzing Feedback Mechanisms in AI-Generated MCQs: Insights into Readability, Lexical Properties, and Levels of Challenge Yaacoub, Antoun Assaghir, Zainab Prevost, Lionel Da-Rugna, Jérôme Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated feedback in educational settings has garnered considerable attention due to its potential to enhance learning outcomes. However, a comprehensive understanding of the linguistic characteristics of AI-generated feedback, including readability, lexical richness, and adaptability across varying challenge levels, remains limited. This study delves into the linguistic and structural attributes of feedback generated by Google's Gemini 1.5-flash text model for computer science multiple-choice questions (MCQs). A dataset of over 1,200 MCQs was analyzed, considering three difficulty levels (easy, medium, hard) and three feedback tones (supportive, neutral, challenging). Key linguistic metrics, such as length, readability scores (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level), vocabulary richness, and lexical density, were computed and examined. A fine-tuned RoBERTa-based multi-task learning (MTL) model was trained to predict these linguistic properties, achieving a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 2.0 for readability and 0.03 for vocabulary richness. The findings reveal significant interaction effects between feedback tone and question difficulty, demonstrating the dynamic adaptation of AI-generated feedback within diverse educational contexts. These insights contribute to the development of more personalized and effective AI-driven feedback mechanisms, highlighting the potential for improved learning outcomes while underscoring the importance of ethical considerations in their design and deployment. |
| title | Analyzing Feedback Mechanisms in AI-Generated MCQs: Insights into Readability, Lexical Properties, and Levels of Challenge |
| topic | Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21013 |