skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


This content will become publicly available on March 21, 2026

Title: Unveiling Scoring Processes: Dissecting the Differences Between LLMs and Human Graders in Automatic Scoring
Award ID(s):
2101104
PAR ID:
10630056
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Springer
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
ISSN:
2211-1662
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Strictly proper scoring rules (SPSR) are incentive compatible for eliciting information about random variables from strategic agents when the principal can reward agents after the realization of the random variables. They also quantify the quality of elicited information, with more accurate predictions receiving higher scores in expectation. In this paper, we extend such scoring rules to settings where a principal elicits private probabilistic beliefs but only has access to agents’ reports. We name our solution Surrogate Scoring Rules (SSR). SSR is built on a bias correction step and an error rate estimation procedure for a reference answer defined using agents’ reports. We show that, with a little information about the prior distribution of the random variables, SSR in a multi-task setting recover SPSR in expectation, as if having access to the ground truth. Therefore, a salient feature of SSR is that they quantify the quality of information despite the lack of ground truth, just as SPSR do for the setting with ground truth. As a by-product, SSR induce dominant uniform strategy truthfulness in reporting. Our method is verified both theoretically and empirically using data collected from real human forecasters. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)