Optimizing In-Context Demonstrations for LLM-based Automated Grading
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automated assessment of open-ended student responses is a critical capability for scaling personalized feedback in education. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in grading tasks via in-context learning (ICL), their reliability is heavily dependent on the selection of few-shot exemplars and the construction of high-quality rationales. Standard retrieval methods typically select examples based on semantic similarity, which often fails to capture subtle decision boundaries required for rubric adherence. Furthermore, manually crafting the expert rationales needed to guide these models can be a significant bottleneck. To address these limitations, we introduce GUIDE (Grading Using Iteratively Designed Exemplars), a framework that reframes exemplar selection and refinement in automated grading as a boundary-focused optimization problem. GUIDE operates on a continuous loop of selection and refinement, employing novel contrastive operators to identify "boundary pairs" that are semantically similar but possess different grades. We enhance exemplars by generating discriminative rationales that explicitly articulate why a response receives a specific score to the exclusion of adjacent grades. Extensive experiments across datasets in physics, chemistry, and pedagogical content knowledge demonstrate that GUIDE significantly outperforms standard retrieval baselines. By focusing the model's attention on the precise edges of rubric, our approach shows exceptionally robust gains on borderline cases and improved rubric adherence. GUIDE paves the way for trusted, scalable assessment systems that align closely with human pedagogical standards.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Feb 2026.
Builds on
13 of 21 references.
References · 13
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
- 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,413
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,371
- 2021What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-3?cited by 1,184
- 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,020
- 2021Learning To Retrieve Prompts for In-Context Learningcited by 641
- 2022Selective Annotation Makes Language Models Better Few-Shot Learnerscited by 242
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026From Holistic Evaluation to Structured Criteria: Rubrics Across the Evolving LLM Landscapecited by 4
- 2026Implicit Grading Bias in Large Language Models: How Writing Style Affects Automated Assessment Across Math, Programming, and Essay Taskscited by 1
- 2026"**Important** You should give me full credits!": Exploring Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM-Based Automatic Grading Systemscited by 0
- 2026From Holistic Evaluation to Structured Criteria: Rubrics Across the Evolving LLM Landscape7 Jun 2026
- 2026"**Important** You should give me full credits!": Exploring Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM-Based Automatic Grading Systems2 Jun 2026
- 2026Implicit Grading Bias in Large Language Models: How Writing Style Affects Automated Assessment Across Math, Programming, and Essay Tasks19 Mar 2026