Exploiting the English Grammar Profile for L2 grammatical analysis with LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating the grammatical competence of second language (L2) learners is essential both for providing targeted feedback and for assessing proficiency. To achieve this, we propose a novel framework leveraging the English Grammar Profile (EGP), a taxonomy of grammatical constructs mapped to the proficiency levels of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), to detect learners' attempts at grammatical constructs and classify them as successful or unsuccessful. This detection can then be used to provide fine-grained feedback. Moreover, the grammatical constructs are used as predictors of proficiency assessment by using automatically detected attempts as predictors of holistic CEFR proficiency. For the selection of grammatical constructs derived from the EGP, rule-based and LLM-based classifiers are compared. We show that LLMs outperform rule-based methods on semantically and pragmatically nuanced constructs, while rule-based approaches remain competitive for constructs that rely purely on morphological or syntactic features and do not require semantic interpretation. For proficiency assessment, we evaluate both rule-based and hybrid pipelines and show that a hybrid approach combining a rule-based pre-filter with an LLM consistently yields the strongest performance. Since our framework operates on pairs of original learner sentences and their corrected counterparts, we also evaluate a fully automated pipeline using automatic grammatical error correction. This pipeline closely approaches the performance of semi-automated systems based on manual corrections, particularly for the detection of successful attempts at grammatical constructs. Overall, our framework emphasises learners' successful attempts in addition to unsuccessful ones, enabling positive, formative feedback and providing actionable insights into grammatical development.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2026.
Builds on
19 of 74 references.
References · 19
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
- 2020GECToR -- Grammatical Error Correction: Tag, Not Rewritecited by 177
- 2024PUB: A Pragmatics Understanding Benchmark for Assessing LLMs' Pragmatics Capabilitiescited by 59
- 2022Grammatical Error Correction: A Survey of the State of the Artcited by 43
- 2022The Better Your Syntax, the Better Your Semantics? Probing Pretrained Language Models for the English Comparative Correlativecited by 35
- 2023Consistency is Key: Disentangling Label Variation in Natural Language Processing with Intra-Annotator Agreementcited by 23
- 2024GPT-3.5 for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 18
7 more
- 2024Can GPT-4 do L2 analytic assessment?cited by 16
- 2023GEE! Grammar Error Explanation with Large Language Modelscited by 15
- 2024How to Make the Most of LLMs' Grammatical Knowledge for Acceptability Judgmentscited by 14
- 2016Universal Dependencies for Learner Englishcited by 11
- 2024Pillars of Grammatical Error Correction: Comprehensive Inspection Of Contemporary Approaches In The Era of Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2025Linguistic Blind Spots of Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2025Exploiting the English Vocabulary Profile for L2 word-level vocabulary assessment with LLMscited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.