mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LLM Performance on a Real, Double-Marked GCSE Benchmark

arXiv 2606.24973 ↗First posted 23 Jun 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We introduce a dataset of 32,534 double-marked real student responses to GCSE mock exams (GCSEs are the UK's national exams, taken at age ~16), spanning 328 questions across five subjects and including handwritten work. We test whether off-the-shelf large language models agree with examiners as closely as the two examiners agree with each other. We find that models overwhelmingly agree well with the examiner consensus across subjects, with the top performing models agreeing more closely with examiners than examiners agree with each other. Models achieve high scores for subjective tasks like English essay marking, as well as handling complex and messy handwritten Maths paper scripts. Agreement is uniform near the examiner line, and not massively discriminated by model size, providing cost-effective automated marking solutions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jun 2026.

Builds on

6 of 18 references.

References · 6

  1. 2023MathVista: Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning of Foundation Models in Visual Contextscited by 1,582
  2. 2024Human-AI Collaborative Essay Scoring: A Dual-Process Framework with LLMscited by 38
  3. 2024Can Large Language Models Automatically Score Proficiency of Written Essays?cited by 34
  4. 2024Can GPT-4 do L2 analytic assessment?cited by 16
  5. 2025TRATES: Trait-Specific Rubric-Assisted Cross-Prompt Essay Scoringcited by 12
  6. 2024Evaluating GPT-4 at Grading Handwritten Solutions in Math Examscited by 10

Built on by

Not cited yet.