# Generative Grading: Near Human-level Accuracy for Automated Feedback on Richly Structured Problems

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.09916 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.09916/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 23 May 2019.

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [ProtoTransformer: A Meta-Learning Approach to Providing Student Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.14035/) (2021)
- [Automating Program Structure Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.10087/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Access to high-quality education at scale is limited by the difficulty of providing student feedback on open-ended assignments in structured domains like computer programming, graphics, and short response questions. This problem has proven to be exceptionally difficult: for humans, it requires large amounts of manual work, and for computers, until recently, achieving anything near human-level accuracy has been unattainable. In this paper, we present generative grading: a novel computational approach for providing feedback at scale that is capable of accurately grading student work and providing nuanced, interpretable feedback. Our approach uses generative descriptions of student cognition, written as probabilistic programs, to synthesise millions of labelled example solutions to a problem; we then learn to infer feedback for real student solutions based on this cognitive model. We apply our methods to three settings. In block-based coding, we achieve a 50% improvement upon the previous best results for feedback, achieving super-human accuracy. In two other widely different domains -- graphical tasks and short text answers -- we achieve major improvement over the previous state of the art by about 4x and 1.5x respectively, approaching human accuracy. In a real classroom, we ran an experiment where we used our system to augment human graders, yielding doubled grading accuracy while halving grading time.