Evaluating the Knowledge Dependency of Questions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The automatic generation of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) has the potential to reduce the time educators spend on student assessment significantly. However, existing evaluation metrics for MCQ generation, such as BLEU, ROUGE, and METEOR, focus on the n-gram based similarity of the generated MCQ to the gold sample in the dataset and disregard their educational value. They fail to evaluate the MCQ's ability to assess the student's knowledge of the corresponding target fact. To tackle this issue, we propose a novel automatic evaluation metric, coined Knowledge Dependent Answerability (KDA), which measures the MCQ's answerability given knowledge of the target fact. Specifically, we first show how to measure KDA based on student responses from a human survey. Then, we propose two automatic evaluation metrics, KDA_disc and KDA_cont, that approximate KDA by leveraging pre-trained language models to imitate students' problem-solving behavior. Through our human studies, we show that KDA_disc and KDA_soft have strong correlations with both (1) KDA and (2) usability in an actual classroom setting, labeled by experts. Furthermore, when combined with n-gram based similarity metrics, KDA_disc and KDA_cont are shown to have a strong predictive power for various expert-labeled MCQ quality measures.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Nov 2022.
Builds on
25 of 39 references.
References · 25
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,243
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
- 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
- 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,114
- 2019BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text miningcited by 1,935
- 2019SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Textcited by 1,404
- 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 973
- 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 851
13 more
- 2017Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questionscited by 742
- 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 713
- 2021Retrieving and Reading: A Comprehensive Survey on Open-domain Question Answeringcited by 178
- 2021MatSciBERT: A Materials Domain Language Model for Text Mining and Information Extractioncited by 82
- 2018Towards a Better Metric for Evaluating Question Generation Systemscited by 52
- 2022Gender and Racial Bias in Visual Question Answering Datasetscited by 39
- 2020Knowledge-Driven Distractor Generation for Cloze-style Multiple Choice Questionscited by 24
- 2020A BERT-based Distractor Generation Scheme with Multi-tasking and Negative Answer Training Strategiescited by 22
- 2022Towards Process-Oriented, Modular, and Versatile Question Generation that Meets Educational Needscited by 19
- 2016TabMCQ: A Dataset of General Knowledge Tables and Multiple-choice Questionscited by 18
- 2019Evaluating Rewards for Question Generation Modelscited by 15
- 2022Quiz Design Task: Helping Teachers Create Quizzes with Automated Question Generationcited by 12
- 2022Leaf: Multiple-Choice Question Generationcited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
9 papers.
- 2025Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the Abovecited by 51
- 2024Distractor Generation in Multiple-Choice Tasks: A Survey of Methods, Datasets, and Evaluationcited by 25
- 2024An Automatic Question Usability Evaluation Toolkitcited by 9
- 2023Evaluation of Question Generation Needs More Referencescited by 8
- 2025Generating Plausible Distractors for Multiple-Choice Questions via Student Choice Predictioncited by 8
- 2023Assessing Distractors in Multiple-Choice Testscited by 3
- 2025QG-SMS: Enhancing Test Item Analysis via Student Modeling and Simulationcited by 3
- 2024Using Large Multimodal Models to Extract Knowledge Components for Knowledge Tracing from Multimedia Question Informationcited by 2
- 2026Cognitive Agent Compilation for Explicit Problem Solver Modelingcited by 0
- 2026Cognitive Agent Compilation for Explicit Problem Solver Modeling7 May 2026
- 2025QG-SMS: Enhancing Test Item Analysis via Student Modeling and Simulation7 Mar 2025
- 2025Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the Above19 Feb 2025
- 2025Generating Plausible Distractors for Multiple-Choice Questions via Student Choice Prediction21 Jan 2025
- 2024Using Large Multimodal Models to Extract Knowledge Components for Knowledge Tracing from Multimedia Question Information30 Sep 2024
- 2024An Automatic Question Usability Evaluation Toolkit30 May 2024
- 2024Distractor Generation in Multiple-Choice Tasks: A Survey of Methods, Datasets, and Evaluation2 Feb 2024
- 2023Assessing Distractors in Multiple-Choice Tests8 Nov 2023
- 2023Evaluation of Question Generation Needs More References26 May 2023