Publicación: Análisis de dos métodos de evaluación automática de análisis semántico latente (LSA): un nuevo método LSA (Inbuilt Rubric) y un método LSA tradicional ( Golden Summary) en resúmenes extraídos de textos expositivos
Fecha
2018
Editor/a
Director/a
Tutor/a
Coordinador/a
Prologuista
Revisor/a
Ilustrador/a
Derechos de acceso
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid
Resumen
El objetivo de este estudio es comparar dos métodos de evaluación automática del análisis semántico latente (LSA): Un nuevo método LSA ( Inbuilt Rubric) y un método LSA tradicional ( Golden Summary). Se analizaron dos condiciones del método Inbuilt Rubric: el número de descriptores léxicos que se utilizan para generar la rúbrica (pocos vs. muchos) y una corrección que penaliza el contenido irrelevante incluido en los resúmenes de los estudiantes (corregido vs. no corregido). Ciento sesenta y seis estudiantes divididos en dos muestras (81 estudiantes universitarios y 85 estudiantes de instituto) participaron en este estudio. Los estudiantes resumieron dos textos expositivos que tenían distinta complejidad (difícil/fácil) y longitud (1,300/500 palabras). Los resultados mostraron que el método Inbuilt Rubric imita las evaluaciones humanas mejor que Golden Summary en todos los casos. La similitud con las evaluaciones humanas fue más alta con Inbuilt Rubric ( r = .78 and r = .79) que con Golden Summary ( r = .67 and r = .47) en ambos textos. Además, la versión de Inbuilt Rubric con menor número de descriptores y con corrección es la que obtuvo mejores resultados.
The purpose of this study was to compare two automatic assessment methods using Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA): a novel LSA assessment method (Inbuilt Rubric) and a traditional LSA method (Golden Summary). Two conditions were analyzed using the Inbuilt Rubric method: the number of lexical descriptors needed to better accommodate an expert rubric (few vs. many) and a weighting function to penalize off-topic contents included in the student summaries (weighted vs. non-weighted). One hundred and sixty-six students divided in two different samples (81 undergraduates and 85 High School students) took part in this study. Students summarized two expository texts that differed in complexity (complex/easy) and length (1,300/500 words). Results showed that the Inbuilt Rubric method simulates human assessment better than Golden summaries in all cases. The similarity with human assessment was higher for Inbuilt Rubric (r = .78 and r = .79) than for Golden Summary ( r = .67 and r = .47) in both texts. Moreover, to accommodate an expert rubric into the Inbuilt Rubric method was better using few descriptors and the weighted function
The purpose of this study was to compare two automatic assessment methods using Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA): a novel LSA assessment method (Inbuilt Rubric) and a traditional LSA method (Golden Summary). Two conditions were analyzed using the Inbuilt Rubric method: the number of lexical descriptors needed to better accommodate an expert rubric (few vs. many) and a weighting function to penalize off-topic contents included in the student summaries (weighted vs. non-weighted). One hundred and sixty-six students divided in two different samples (81 undergraduates and 85 High School students) took part in this study. Students summarized two expository texts that differed in complexity (complex/easy) and length (1,300/500 words). Results showed that the Inbuilt Rubric method simulates human assessment better than Golden summaries in all cases. The similarity with human assessment was higher for Inbuilt Rubric (r = .78 and r = .79) than for Golden Summary ( r = .67 and r = .47) in both texts. Moreover, to accommodate an expert rubric into the Inbuilt Rubric method was better using few descriptors and the weighted function
Descripción
Categorías UNESCO
Palabras clave
LSA, Inbuilt rubric, Automatic essay scoring (AES), Lexical descriptors, Summaries, Descriptores léxicos, Resúmenes
Citación
Centro
Facultad de Psicología
Departamento
Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento