Exploring LLM Autoscoring Reliability in Large-Scale Writing Assessments Using Generalizability Theory
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This study investigates the estimation of reliability for large language models (LLMs) in scoring writing tasks from the AP Chinese Language and Culture Exam. Using generalizability theory, the research evaluates and compares score consistency between human and AI raters across two types of AP Chinese free-response writing tasks: story narration and email response. These essays were independently scored by two trained human raters and seven AI raters. Each essay received four scores: one holistic score and three analytic scores corresponding to the domains of task completion, delivery, and language use. Results indicate that although human raters produced more reliable scores overall, LLMs demonstrated reasonable consistency under certain conditions, particularly for story narration tasks. Composite scoring that incorporates both human and AI raters improved reliability, which supports that hybrid scoring models may offer benefits for large-scale writing assessments.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jul 2025.
Builds on
5 of 23 references.
References · 5
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2023Applying Large Language Models and Chain-of-Thought for Automatic Scoringcited by 69
- 2023Fine-tuning ChatGPT for Automatic Scoringcited by 51
- 2024Human-AI Collaborative Essay Scoring: A Dual-Process Framework with LLMscited by 38
- 2023LLM-as-a-tutor in EFL Writing Education: Focusing on Evaluation of Student-LLM Interactioncited by 29
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Hidden Measurement Error in LLM Pipelines Distorts Annotation, Evaluation, and Benchmarkingcited by 10
- 2026Deployment Decision Reliability: A Generalizability-Theory Framework for Sizing Long-Horizon Agent Evaluationscited by 4
- 2026Ask Which, Not How Good: Sizing Benchmarks Scored by an LLMcited by 0
- 2026SoK: Grading Open-Text Legal Answers, from Law School Exams to Trustworthy Rubric Judgescited by 0
- 2026SoK: Grading Open-Text Legal Answers, from Law School Exams to Trustworthy Rubric Judges14 Oct 2026
- 2026Ask Which, Not How Good: Sizing Benchmarks Scored by an LLM17 Aug 2026
- 2026Deployment Decision Reliability: A Generalizability-Theory Framework for Sizing Long-Horizon Agent Evaluations11 Aug 2026
- 2026Hidden Measurement Error in LLM Pipelines Distorts Annotation, Evaluation, and Benchmarking13 Apr 2026