mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AutoSCORE: Enhancing Automated Scoring with Multi-Agent Large Language Models via Structured Component Recognition

arXiv 2509.21910 ↗First posted 26 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 13

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks

Abstract (arXiv)

Automated scoring plays a crucial role in education by reducing the reliance on human raters, offering scalable and immediate evaluation of student work. While large language models (LLMs) have shown strong potential in this task, their use as end-to-end raters faces challenges such as low accuracy, prompt sensitivity, limited interpretability, and rubric misalignment. These issues hinder the implementation of LLM-based automated scoring in assessment practice. To address the limitations, we propose AutoSCORE, a multi-agent LLM framework enhancing automated scoring via rubric-aligned Structured COmponent REcognition. With two agents, AutoSCORE first extracts rubric-relevant components from student responses and encodes them into a structured representation (i.e., Scoring Rubric Component Extraction Agent), which is then used to assign final scores (i.e., Scoring Agent). This design ensures that model reasoning follows a human-like grading process, enhancing interpretability and robustness. We evaluate AutoSCORE on four benchmark datasets from the ASAP benchmark, using both proprietary and open-source LLMs (GPT-4o, LLaMA-3.1-8B, and LLaMA-3.1-70B). Across diverse tasks and rubrics, AutoSCORE consistently improves scoring accuracy, human-machine agreement (QWK, correlations), and error metrics (MAE, RMSE) compared to single-agent baselines, with particularly strong benefits on complex, multi-dimensional rubrics, and especially large relative gains on smaller LLMs. These results demonstrate that structured component recognition combined with multi-agent design offers a scalable, reliable, and interpretable solution for automated scoring.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 21 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2025.

Builds on

21 of 53 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024AutoML-Agent: A Multi-Agent LLM Framework for Full-Pipeline AutoML3 Oct

Other references · 20

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  4. 2025Rubrics as Rewards: Reinforcement Learning Beyond Verifiable Domainscited by 366
  5. 2024Judging the Judges: A Systematic Study of Position Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 269
  6. 2024What Did I Do Wrong? Quantifying LLMs' Sensitivity and Consistency to Prompt Engineeringcited by 90
  7. 2023Applying Large Language Models and Chain-of-Thought for Automatic Scoringcited by 69
  8. 2023Fine-tuning ChatGPT for Automatic Scoringcited by 51
  9. 2024Can Large Language Models Automatically Score Proficiency of Written Essays?cited by 35
  10. 2024Unleashing Large Language Models' Proficiency in Zero-shot Essay Scoringcited by 33
  11. 2023Context Matters: A Strategy to Pre-train Language Model for Science Educationcited by 32
  12. 2020Prompt Agnostic Essay Scorer: A Domain Generalization Approach to Cross-prompt Automated Essay Scoringcited by 22
8 more
  1. 2024Rationale Behind Essay Scores: Enhancing S-LLM's Multi-Trait Essay Scoring with Rationale Generated by LLMscited by 22
  2. 2024Can AI grade your essays? A comparative analysis of large language models and teacher ratings in multidimensional essay scoringcited by 20
  3. 2023Matching Exemplar as Next Sentence Prediction (MeNSP): Zero-shot Prompt Learning for Automatic Scoring in Science Educationcited by 18
  4. 2024Unveiling Scoring Processes: Dissecting the Differences between LLMs and Human Graders in Automatic Scoringcited by 13
  5. 2019Co-Attention Based Neural Network for Source-Dependent Essay Scoringcited by 11
  6. 2025Focus Directions Make Your Language Models Pay More Attention to Relevant Contextscited by 9
  7. 2025Artificial Intelligence Bias on English Language Learners in Automatic Scoringcited by 3
  8. 2024G-SciEdBERT: A Contextualized LLM for Science Assessment Tasks in Germancited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 13.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025LLM Agents at the Roundtable: A Multi-Perspective and Dialectical Reasoning Framework for Essay Scoring
  2. 2024Grade Like a Human: Rethinking Automated Assessment with Large Language Models
  3. 2026Machine-Assisted Grading of Nationwide School-Leaving Essay Exams with LLMs and Statistical NLP
  4. 2025Rubric-Conditioned LLM Grading: Alignment, Uncertainty, and Robustness
  5. 2024A LLM-Powered Automatic Grading Framework with Human-Level Guidelines Optimization
  6. 2026Evaluating Austrian A-Level German Essays with Large Language Models for Automated Essay Scoring
  7. 2025CAFES: A Collaborative Multi-Agent Framework for Multi-Granular Multimodal Essay Scoring
  8. 2024Investigating Automatic Scoring and Feedback using Large Language Models