mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

An Automatic Question Usability Evaluation Toolkit

arXiv 2405.20529 ↗First posted 30 May 2024cs.AI cs.CLcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Evaluating multiple-choice questions (MCQs) involves either labor intensive human assessments or automated methods that prioritize readability, often overlooking deeper question design flaws. To address this issue, we introduce the Scalable Automatic Question Usability Evaluation Toolkit (SAQUET), an open-source tool that leverages the Item-Writing Flaws (IWF) rubric for a comprehensive and automated quality evaluation of MCQs. By harnessing the latest in large language models such as GPT-4, advanced word embeddings, and Transformers designed to analyze textual complexity, SAQUET effectively pinpoints and assesses a wide array of flaws in MCQs. We first demonstrate the discrepancy between commonly used automated evaluation metrics and the human assessment of MCQ quality. Then we evaluate SAQUET on a diverse dataset of MCQs across the five domains of Chemistry, Statistics, Computer Science, Humanities, and Healthcare, showing how it effectively distinguishes between flawed and flawless questions, providing a level of analysis beyond what is achievable with traditional metrics. With an accuracy rate of over 94% in detecting the presence of flaws identified by human evaluators, our findings emphasize the limitations of existing evaluation methods and showcase potential in improving the quality of educational assessments.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 May 2024.

Builds on

12 of 27 references.

References · 12

  1. 2015A Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Modelscited by 1,068
  2. 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 155
  3. 2023A Comparative Study of AI-Generated (GPT-4) and Human-crafted MCQs in Programming Educationcited by 34
  4. 2018Identifying Well-formed Natural Language Questionscited by 29
  5. 2022Multiple-Choice Question Generation: Towards an Automated Assessment Frameworkcited by 23
  6. 2023Assessing the Quality of Multiple-Choice Questions Using GPT-4 and Rule-Based Methodscited by 23
  7. 2023Scalable Educational Question Generation with Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 19
  8. 2024How Teachers Can Use Large Language Models and Bloom's Taxonomy to Create Educational Quizzescited by 17
  9. 2023Distractor generation for multiple-choice questions with predictive prompting and large language modelscited by 15
  10. 2022Evaluating the Knowledge Dependency of Questionscited by 9
  11. 2023Automatic Answerability Evaluation for Question Generationcited by 5
  12. 2023Automating question generation from educational textcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 5; 2026: 3.

9 papers.