Using Large Language Models to Support High Volume Application Review for an Undergraduate Research Program
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Using Large Language Models to Support High Volume Application Review for an Undergraduate Research Program
Abstract:Undergraduate research programs such as the Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) at Purdue University receive thousands of applications every year, requiring significant time and effort for program staff to evaluate each submission consistently and within tight timelines. This work-in-progress paper describes the development and initial deployment of a large language model (LLM)-based tool to assist in the evaluation of approximately 1,200 student Statements of Purpose (SoPs) for the SURF 2026 cycle at Purdue University. The workflow utilizes OpenAI GPT models (GPT-4o, GPT-5-mini, and GPT-5.2) and uses a structured rubric across six subcategories, each scored on a 0-3 scale. A few SoPs, graded by program staff, were used to tune the model responses. The model prompt was designed to generate both numerical scores, rationales (including positive and negative aspects) and short excerpts from each submission. Using GPT-5.2, the full batch of 1,200 SoPs was processed in approximately 4.6 hours of compute time, averaging roughly 14 seconds per SoP (with per-SoP timing varying with SoP length, which ranged from 500 to 2,000 words). Notable differences in rubric adherence were observed across model versions, with GPT-5.2 adhering most closely. Disagreement in model scores was more pronounced for lower-scoring submissions. The LLM outputs replicated the role previously played by distributed human graders, providing the program coordinator with scored and rationale-annotated outputs for the entire applicant pool. The program coordinator then reviewed these outputs alongside each applicant's SoP, applying the same downstream office criteria used in prior SURF cycles, to produce a shortlist of strong candidates. This coordinator review was completed in approximately 4 hours, compared to the multi-week coordination effort required in prior program cycles.
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2606.05564 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2606.05564v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.05564
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
Epidemiology of Model Collapse: Modeling Synthetic Data Contamination via Bilayer SIR Dynamics
Jun 5
-
Predict and Reconstruct: Joint Objectives for Self-Supervised Language Representation Learning
Jun 5
-
Improving Heart-Focused Medical Question Answering in LLMs via Variance-Aware Rubric Rewards with GRPO
Jun 5
-
Generic Triple-Latent Compression with Gated Associative Retrieval
Jun 5
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.