Detecting Problem Statements in Peer Assessments
Effective peer assessment requires students to be attentive to the deficiencies in the work they rate. Thus, their reviews should identify problems. But what ways are there to check that they do? We attempt to automate the process of deciding whether a review comment detects a problem. We use over 18,000 review comments that were labeled by the reviewees as either detecting or not detecting a problem with the work. We deploy several traditional machine-learning models, as well as neural-network models using GloVe and BERT embeddings. We find that the best performer is the Hierarchical Attention Network classifier, followed by the Bidirectional Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) Attention and Capsule model with scores of 93.1% and 90.5% respectively. The best non-neural network model was the support vector machine with a score of 89.71%. This is followed by the Stochastic Gradient Descent model and the Logistic Regression model with 89.70% and 88.98%.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
ALL-IN-ONE: Multi-Task Learning BERT models for Evaluating Peer Assessments
Peer assessment has been widely applied across diverse academic fields over the last few decades and has demonstrated its effectiveness. However, the advantages of peer assessment can only be achieved with high-quality p…
AllMulti-Task LearningPeer Selection with Noisy Assessments
In the peer selection problem a group of agents must select a subset of themselves as winners for, e.g., peer-reviewed grants or prizes. Here, we take a Condorcet view of this aggregation problem, i.e., that there is a g…
Methods for Ordinal Peer Grading
MOOCs have the potential to revolutionize higher education with their wide outreach and accessibility, but they require instructors to come up with scalable alternates to traditional student evaluation. Peer grading -- h…
WOLF: Werewolf-based Observations for LLM Deception and Falsehoods
Deception is a fundamental challenge for multi-agent reasoning: effective systems must strategically conceal information while detecting misleading behavior in others. Yet most evaluations reduce deception to static clas…
Counterargument for Critical Thinking as Judged by AI and Humans
This intervention study investigates the use of counterarguments in writing for critical thinking by students in the context of Generative AI (GenAI). This is especially as risks of cheating and cognitive offloading exis…