Neural Networks or Linguistic Features? - Comparing Different Machine-Learning Approaches for Automated Assessment of Text Quality Traits Among L1- and L2-Learners’ Argumentative Essays

Recent investigations in automated essay scoring research imply that hybrid models, which combine feature engineering and the powerful tools of deep neural networks (DNNs), reach state-of-the-art performance. However, most of these findings are from holistic scoring tasks. In the present study, we use a total of four prompts from two different corpora consisting of both L1 and L2 learner essays annotated with trait scores (e.g., content, organization, and language quality). In our main experiments, we compare three variants of trait-specific models using different inputs: (1) models based on 220 linguistic features, (2) models using essay-level contextual embeddings from the distilled version of the pre-trained transformer BERT (DistilBERT), and (3) a hybrid model using both types of features. Results imply that when trait-specific models are trained based on a single resource, the feature-based models slightly outperform the embedding-based models. These differences are most prominent for the organization traits. The hybrid models outperform the single-resource models, indicating that linguistic features and embeddings indeed capture partially different aspects relevant for the assessment of essay traits. To gain more insights into the interplay between both feature types, we run addition and ablation tests for individual feature groups. Trait-specific addition tests across prompts indicate that the embedding-based models can most consistently be enhanced in content assessment when combined with morphological complexity features. Most consistent performance gains in the organization traits are achieved when embeddings are combined with length features, and most consistent performance gains in the assessment of the language traits when combined with lexical complexity, error, and occurrence features. Cross-prompt scoring again reveals slight advantages for the feature-based models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Published
2024-09-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00426-w
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Text Readability and Simplification
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.04

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Neural Networks or Linguistic Features? - Comparing Different Machine-Learning Approaches for Automated Assessment of Text Quality Traits Among L1- and L2-Learners’ Argumentative Essays

Jens Møller, Julian F. Lohmann, Fynn Junge, Stefan Keller et al.
3 citations
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Text Readability and Simplification
1.04
article

Neural Networks or Linguistic Features? - Comparing Different Machine-Learning Approaches for Automated Assessment of Text Quality Traits Among L1- and L2-Learners’ Argumentative Essays

Jens Møller, Julian F. Lohmann, Fynn Junge, Stefan Keller, Thorben Jansen, Andrea Horbach, Ruth Trüb, Johanna Fleckenstein
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Recent investigations in automated essay scoring research imply that hybrid models, which combine feature engineering and the powerful tools of deep neural networks (DNNs), reach state-of-the-art performance. However, most of these findings are from holistic scoring tasks. In the present study, we use a total of four prompts from two different corpora consisting of both L1 and L2 learner essays annotated with trait scores (e.g., content, organization, and language quality). In our main experiments, we compare three variants of trait-specific models using different inputs: (1) models based on 220 linguistic features, (2) models using essay-level contextual embeddings from the distilled version of the pre-trained transformer BERT (DistilBERT), and (3) a hybrid model using both types of features. Results imply that when trait-specific models are trained based on a single resource, the feature-based models slightly outperform the embedding-based models. These differences are most prominent for the organization traits. The hybrid models outperform the single-resource models, indicating that linguistic features and embeddings indeed capture partially different aspects relevant for the assessment of essay traits. To gain more insights into the interplay between both feature types, we run addition and ablation tests for individual feature groups. Trait-specific addition tests across prompts indicate that the embedding-based models can most consistently be enhanced in content assessment when combined with morphological complexity features. Most consistent performance gains in the organization traits are achieved when embeddings are combined with length features, and most consistent performance gains in the assessment of the language traits when combined with lexical complexity, error, and occurrence features. Cross-prompt scoring again reveals slight advantages for the feature-based models.

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in EducationVol. 35(3)
FernUniversität in Hagen (DE), University of Hildesheim (DE), FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (CH), Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (DE), Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (DE), Zurich University of Teacher Education (CH)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Text Readability and Simplification
1.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.