Cost-efficient generative AI summarization for scalable automated essay scoring in educational assessment
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Cost-efficient generative AI summarization for scalable automated essay scoring in educational assessment
Abstract:Automated essay scoring (AES) enables scalable assessment and timely feedback but remains challenged by transformer input-length limitations, which can cause information loss when processing long essays. This study proposes a generative AI-assisted summarization framework to improve long-form essay representation while maintaining scoring reliability. Using the ASAP 2.0 dataset, we generate controlled-length summaries with three GPT-5 variants (GPT-5, GPT-5 mini, and GPT-5 nano) and use them as inputs for downstream AES models. To preserve original writing signals, handcrafted linguistic features extracted from full essays are integrated with summary representations to form a hybrid framework. The approach is evaluated in terms of scoring performance, summarization quality, and computational cost. Scoring reliability is measured using quadratic weighted kappa (QWK), while summary quality is assessed through lexical overlap, semantic similarity, information retention, and redundancy metrics. Results show that GPT-5 mini achieves the highest agreement with human ratings, whereas GPT-5 produces the strongest summarization quality. Summary quality decreases for higher-scoring essays, indicating that more complex writing is more difficult to compress without information loss. These findings reveal trade-offs among model capacity, summary fidelity, cost efficiency, and preservation of educational constructs. This study provides an initial controlled evaluation of GPT-based summarization for AES and identifies important baselines and ablation studies required for future generalization. Overall, generative AI summarization offers a promising approach for scalable writing assessment while requiring careful validation of information preservation and fairness.
| Comments: | 23 pages, 7 figures, 5 tables |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2607.15829 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2607.15829v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.15829
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
-
Distinguishing Revision and Delayed Elaboration in Incremental Narrative Interpretation
Aug 25
-
KSE-Web: An Analysis of Hybrid Retrieval and LLM-Assisted Query Expansion for Low-Resource Khmer Semantic Search
Aug 25
-
Wazobia Eval: A Benchmark for Nigerian Pidgin Emotion Understanding, Sarcasm Detection, and Cultural Reasoning
Aug 25
-
On the Role of Citations in Preference Data
Aug 25
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.