mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Using Large Language Models to Support High Volume Application Review for an Undergraduate Research Program

arXiv 2606.05564 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Undergraduate research programs such as the Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) at Purdue University receive thousands of applications every year, requiring significant time and effort for program staff to evaluate each submission consistently and within tight timelines. This work-in-progress paper describes the development and initial deployment of a large language model (LLM)-based tool to assist in the evaluation of approximately 1,200 student Statements of Purpose (SoPs) for the SURF 2026 cycle at Purdue University. The workflow utilizes OpenAI GPT models (GPT-4o, GPT-5-mini, and GPT-5.2) and uses a structured rubric across six subcategories, each scored on a 0-3 scale. A few SoPs, graded by program staff, were used to tune the model responses. The model prompt was designed to generate both numerical scores, rationales (including positive and negative aspects) and short excerpts from each submission. Using GPT-5.2, the full batch of 1,200 SoPs was processed in approximately 4.6 hours of compute time, averaging roughly 14 seconds per SoP (with per-SoP timing varying with SoP length, which ranged from 500 to 2,000 words). Notable differences in rubric adherence were observed across model versions, with GPT-5.2 adhering most closely. Disagreement in model scores was more pronounced for lower-scoring submissions. The LLM outputs replicated the role previously played by distributed human graders, providing the program coordinator with scored and rationale-annotated outputs for the entire applicant pool. The program coordinator then reviewed these outputs alongside each applicant's SoP, applying the same downstream office criteria used in prior SURF cycles, to produce a shortlist of strong candidates. This coordinator review was completed in approximately 4 hours, compared to the multi-week coordination effort required in prior program cycles.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2026.

Builds on

3 of 19 references.

References · 3

  1. 2024Can Large Language Models Automatically Score Proficiency of Written Essays?cited by 34
  2. 2026Autorubric: A Unifying Framework for Rubric-Based LLM Evaluation on Non-Verifiable Taskscited by 23
  3. 2026LLMs Do Not Grade Essays Like Humanscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.