Can LLMs Identify Gaps and Misconceptions in Students' Code Explanations?
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → LLM preference optimization methods
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper investigates various approaches using Large Language Models (LLMs) to identify gaps and misconceptions in students' self-explanations of specific instructional material, in our case explanations of code examples. This research is a part of our larger effort to automate the assessment of students' freely generated responses, focusing specifically on their self-explanations of code examples during activities related to code comprehension. In this work, we experiment with zero-shot prompting, Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), and preference alignment of LLMs to identify gaps in students' self-explanation. With simple prompting, GPT-4 consistently outperformed LLaMA3 and Mistral in identifying gaps and misconceptions, as confirmed by human evaluations. Additionally, our results suggest that fine-tuned large language models are more effective at identifying gaps in students' explanations compared to zero-shot and few-shot prompting techniques. Furthermore, our findings show that the preference optimization approach using Odds Ratio Preference Optimization (ORPO) outperforms SFT in identifying gaps and misconceptions in students' code explanations.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. First posted on arXiv 9 Dec 2024.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026AI In Cybersecurity Education -- Scalable Agentic CTF Design Principles and Educational Outcomescited by 1
- 2026Exploring the Effectiveness of Using LLMs for Automated Assessment of Student Self Explanations in Programming Educationcited by 0
- 2026Taxonomy-Targeted Error Generation for Quantitative Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Self-Explanation Tutor for Active Study of CS1 Worked Examplescited by 0
- 2026Self-Explanation Tutor for Active Study of CS1 Worked Examples25 Aug 2026
- 2026Taxonomy-Targeted Error Generation for Quantitative Reasoning27 May 2026
- 2026Exploring the Effectiveness of Using LLMs for Automated Assessment of Student Self Explanations in Programming Education20 May 2026
- 2026AI In Cybersecurity Education -- Scalable Agentic CTF Design Principles and Educational Outcomes23 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2023Automated Assessment of Students' Code Comprehension using LLMs
- 2025Do LLMs Make Mistakes Like Students? Exploring Natural Alignment between Language Models and Human Error Patterns
- 2024Code Prompting Elicits Conditional Reasoning Abilities in Text+Code LLMs
- 2026Not the Example, but the Process: How Self-Generated Examples Enhance LLM Reasoning
- 2024Evaluating Human Alignment and Model Faithfulness of LLM Rationale
- 2024One Step at a Time: Combining LLMs and Static Analysis to Generate Next-Step Hints for Programming Tasks
- 2026When Do Explanations Help In-Context Learning? A Comparative Study of Natural Language Explanation Types and Faithfulness
- 2025LLMs can be easily Confused by Instructional Distractions