A Small-Scale Evaluation of Large Language Models Used for Grammatical Error Correction in a German Children’s Literature Corpus: A Comparative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Grammatical error correction (GEC) has become increasingly important for enhancing the quality of OCR-scanned texts. This small-scale study explores the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) for GEC in German children’s literature, a genre with unique linguistic challenges due to modified language, colloquial expressions, and complex layouts that often lead to OCR-induced errors. While conventional rule-based and statistical approaches have been used in the past, advancements in machine learning and artificial intelligence have introduced models capable of more contextually nuanced corrections. Despite these developments, limited research has been conducted on evaluating the effectiveness of state-of-the-art LLMs, specifically in the context of German children’s literature. To address this gap, we fine-tuned encoder-based models GBERT and GELECTRA on German children’s literature, and compared their performance to decoder-based models GPT-4o and Llama series (versions 3.2 and 3.1) in a zero-shot setting. Our results demonstrate that all pretrained models, both encoder-based (GBERT, GELECTRA) and decoder-based (GPT-4o, Llama series), failed to effectively remove OCR-generated noise in children’s literature, highlighting the necessity of a preprocessing step to handle structural inconsistencies and artifacts introduced during scanning. This study also addresses the lack of comparative evaluations between encoder-based and decoder-based models for German GEC, with most prior work focusing on English. Quantitative analysis reveals that decoder-based models significantly outperform fine-tuned encoder-based models, with GPT-4o and Llama-3.1-70B achieving the highest accuracy in both error detection and correction. Qualitative assessment further highlights distinct model behaviors: GPT-4o demonstrates the most consistent correction performance, handling grammatical nuances effectively while minimizing overcorrection. Llama-3.1-70B excels in error detection but occasionally relies on frequency-based substitutions over meaning-driven corrections. Unlike earlier decoder-based models, which often exhibited overcorrection tendencies, our findings indicate that state-of-the-art decoder-based models strike a better balance between correction accuracy and semantic preservation. By identifying the strengths and limitations of different model architectures, this study enhances the accessibility and readability of OCR-scanned German children’s literature. It also provides new insights into the role of preprocessing in digitized text correction, the comparative performance of encoder- and decoder-based models, and the evolving correction tendencies of modern LLMs. These findings contribute to language preservation, corpus linguistics, and digital archiving, offering an AI-driven solution for improving the quality of digitized children’s literature while ensuring linguistic and cultural integrity. Future research should explore multimodal approaches that integrate visual context to further enhance correction accuracy for children’s books with image-embedded text.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».