On the Use of Bert for Automated Essay Scoring: Joint Learning of Multi-Scale Essay Representation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, pre-trained models have become dominant in most natural language processing (NLP) tasks. However, in the area of Automated Essay Scoring (AES), pre-trained models such as BERT have not been properly used to outperform other deep learning models such as LSTM. In this paper, we introduce a novel multi-scale essay representation for BERT that can be jointly learned. We also employ multiple losses and transfer learning from out-of-domain essays to further improve the performance. Experiment results show that our approach derives much benefit from joint learning of multi-scale essay representation and obtains almost the state-of-the-art result among all deep learning models in the ASAP 1 task. Our multi-scale essay representation also generalizes well to CommonLit Readability Prize (CRP 2 ) data set, which suggests that the novel text representation proposed in this paper may be a new and effective choice for long-text tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it