Evaluating GPT-4 at Grading Handwritten Solutions in Math Exams
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (AI) have shown promise in accurately grading open-ended student responses. However, few prior works have explored grading handwritten responses due to a lack of data and the challenge of combining visual and textual information. In this work, we leverage state-of-the-art multi-modal AI models, in particular GPT-4o, to automatically grade handwritten responses to college-level math exams. Using real student responses to questions in a probability theory exam, we evaluate GPT-4o's alignment with ground-truth scores from human graders using various prompting techniques. We find that while providing rubrics improves alignment, the model's overall accuracy is still too low for real-world settings, showing there is significant room for growth in this task.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 6 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Nov 2024.
Builds on
2 of 6 references.
References · 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 7.
10 papers.
- 2025StepMathAgent: A Step-Wise Agent for Evaluating Mathematical Processes through Tree-of-Errorcited by 3
- 2025Automated Grading of Students' Handwritten Graphs: A Comparison of Meta-Learning and Vision-Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2026Evaluating AI Grading on Real-World Handwritten College Mathematics: A Large-Scale Study Toward a Benchmarkcited by 1
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop LLM Grading for Handwritten Mathematics Assessmentscited by 1
- 2025Generative AI performance in core undergraduate mathematics: a curriculum-level case studycited by 0
- 2026Grading Handwritten Engineering Exams with Multimodal Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Can MLLMs Read Students' Minds? Unpacking Multimodal Error Analysis in Handwritten Mathcited by 0
- 2026Is Mathematical Problem-Solving Expertise in Large Language Models Associated with Assessment Performance?cited by 0
- 2026LLM Performance on a Real, Double-Marked GCSE Benchmarkcited by 0
- 2026A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for AI-Assisted Scoring in Large-Scale Writing Assessmentcited by 0
- 2026A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for AI-Assisted Scoring in Large-Scale Writing Assessment4 Sep 2026
- 2026LLM Performance on a Real, Double-Marked GCSE Benchmark23 Jun 2026
- 2026Is Mathematical Problem-Solving Expertise in Large Language Models Associated with Assessment Performance?26 Mar 2026
- 2026Can MLLMs Read Students' Minds? Unpacking Multimodal Error Analysis in Handwritten Math26 Mar 2026
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop LLM Grading for Handwritten Mathematics Assessments13 Mar 2026
- 2026Evaluating AI Grading on Real-World Handwritten College Mathematics: A Large-Scale Study Toward a Benchmark1 Mar 2026
- 2026Grading Handwritten Engineering Exams with Multimodal Large Language Models2 Jan 2026
- 2025Generative AI performance in core undergraduate mathematics: a curriculum-level case study15 Sep 2025
- 2025Automated Grading of Students' Handwritten Graphs: A Comparison of Meta-Learning and Vision-Large Language Models3 Jul 2025
- 2025StepMathAgent: A Step-Wise Agent for Evaluating Mathematical Processes through Tree-of-Error13 Mar 2025