mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Automatic Generation and Evaluation of Reading Comprehension Test Items with Large Language Models

arXiv 2404.07720 ↗First posted 11 Apr 2024cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Reading comprehension tests are used in a variety of applications, reaching from education to assessing the comprehensibility of simplified texts. However, creating such tests manually and ensuring their quality is difficult and time-consuming. In this paper, we explore how large language models (LLMs) can be used to generate and evaluate multiple-choice reading comprehension items. To this end, we compiled a dataset of German reading comprehension items and developed a new protocol for human and automatic evaluation, including a metric we call text informativity, which is based on guessability and answerability. We then used this protocol and the dataset to evaluate the quality of items generated by Llama 2 and GPT-4. Our results suggest that both models are capable of generating items of acceptable quality in a zero-shot setting, but GPT-4 clearly outperforms Llama 2. We also show that LLMs can be used for automatic evaluation by eliciting item reponses from them. In this scenario, evaluation results with GPT-4 were the most similar to human annotators. Overall, zero-shot generation with LLMs is a promising approach for generating and evaluating reading comprehension test items, in particular for languages without large amounts of available data.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Apr 2024.

Builds on

19 of 53 references.

References · 19

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  3. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
  4. 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 861
  5. 2020Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summariescited by 378
  6. 2023The Belebele Benchmark: a Parallel Reading Comprehension Dataset in 122 Language Variantscited by 311
  7. 2017Learning to Ask: Neural Question Generation for Reading Comprehensioncited by 186
  8. 2017Neural Question Generation from Text: A Preliminary Studycited by 78
  9. 2019Learning Latent Parameters without Human Response Patterns: Item Response Theory with Artificial Crowdscited by 40
  10. 2017Machine Comprehension by Text-to-Text Neural Question Generationcited by 32
  11. 2023MQAG: Multiple-choice Question Answering and Generation for Assessing Information Consistency in Summarizationcited by 30
  12. 2022Multiple-Choice Question Generation: Towards an Automated Assessment Frameworkcited by 23
7 more
  1. 2022Question Generation for Reading Comprehension Assessment by Modeling How and What to Askcited by 20
  2. 2019Learning to Answer by Learning to Ask: Getting the Best of GPT-2 and BERT Worldscited by 19
  3. 2020STARC: Structured Annotations for Reading Comprehensioncited by 17
  4. 2020EQG-RACE: Examination-Type Question Generationcited by 15
  5. 2020Simplifying Paragraph-level Question Generation via Transformer Language Modelscited by 12
  6. 2022World Knowledge in Multiple Choice Reading Comprehensioncited by 6
  7. 2023Analyzing Multiple-Choice Reading and Listening Comprehension Testscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

5 papers.