REVIEW 1 cited by
Automated Grading of Students' Handwritten Graphs: A Comparison of Meta-Learning and Vision-Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Automated Grading of Students' Handwritten Graphs: A Comparison of Meta-Learning and Vision-Large Language Models
read the original abstract
With the rise of online learning, the demand for efficient and consistent assessment in mathematics has significantly increased over the past decade. Machine Learning (ML), particularly Natural Language Processing (NLP), has been widely used for autograding student responses, particularly those involving text and/or mathematical expressions. However, there has been limited research on autograding responses involving students' handwritten graphs, despite their prevalence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) curricula. In this study, we implement multimodal meta-learning models for autograding images containing students' handwritten graphs and text. We further compare the performance of Vision Large Language Models (VLLMs) with these specially trained metalearning models. Our results, evaluated on a real-world dataset collected from our institution, show that the best-performing meta-learning models outperform VLLMs in 2-way classification tasks. In contrast, in more complex 3-way classification tasks, the best-performing VLLMs slightly outperform the meta-learning models. While VLLMs show promising results, their reliability and practical applicability remain uncertain and require further investigation.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
EDU-CIRCUIT-HW: Evaluating Multimodal Large Language Models on Real-World University-Level STEM Student Handwritten Solutions
EDU-CIRCUIT-HW reveals large latent recognition failures in MLLMs on real handwritten university STEM solutions, limiting auto-grading reliability, though hybrid human-AI routing of only 3.3% cases improves outcomes.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.