TOWARDS EFFECTIVE ARGUMENTATION: DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A GENERATIVE AI-BASED EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK SYSTEM

IF 1.1 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Hunkoog Jho, Minsu Ha
{"title":"TOWARDS EFFECTIVE ARGUMENTATION: DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A GENERATIVE AI-BASED EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK SYSTEM","authors":"Hunkoog Jho, Minsu Ha","doi":"10.33225/jbse/24.23.280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed at examining the performance of generative artificial intelligence to extract argumentation elements from text. Thus, the researchers developed a web-based framework to provide automated assessment and feedback relying on a large language model, ChatGPT. The results produced by ChatGPT were compared to human experts across scientific and non-scientific contexts. The findings revealed marked discrepancies in the performance of AI for extracting argument components, with a significant variance between issues of a scientific nature and those that are not. Higher accuracy was noted in identifying claims, data, and qualifiers, as opposed to rebuttals, backing, and warrants. The study illuminated AI's promise for educational applications but also its shortcomings, such as the increased frequency of erroneous element identification when accuracy was low. This highlights the essential need for more in-depth comparative research on models and the further development of AI to enhance its role in supporting argumentation training.\nKeywords: argumentative writing, artificial intelligence, automated assessment, natural language processing, web architecture","PeriodicalId":46424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Baltic Science Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Baltic Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.280","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed at examining the performance of generative artificial intelligence to extract argumentation elements from text. Thus, the researchers developed a web-based framework to provide automated assessment and feedback relying on a large language model, ChatGPT. The results produced by ChatGPT were compared to human experts across scientific and non-scientific contexts. The findings revealed marked discrepancies in the performance of AI for extracting argument components, with a significant variance between issues of a scientific nature and those that are not. Higher accuracy was noted in identifying claims, data, and qualifiers, as opposed to rebuttals, backing, and warrants. The study illuminated AI's promise for educational applications but also its shortcomings, such as the increased frequency of erroneous element identification when accuracy was low. This highlights the essential need for more in-depth comparative research on models and the further development of AI to enhance its role in supporting argumentation training. Keywords: argumentative writing, artificial intelligence, automated assessment, natural language processing, web architecture
实现有效论证:基于人工智能的生成式评估和反馈系统的设计与实施
本研究旨在考察生成式人工智能从文本中提取论证要素的性能。因此,研究人员开发了一个基于网络的框架,依靠大型语言模型 ChatGPT 提供自动评估和反馈。研究人员将 ChatGPT 得出的结果与人类专家在科学和非科学语境下得出的结果进行了比较。研究结果表明,人工智能在提取论证成分方面的表现存在明显差异,在科学问题和非科学问题之间存在显著差异。与反驳、支持和授权相比,识别主张、数据和限定词的准确性更高。这项研究揭示了人工智能在教育应用方面的前景,但也指出了其不足之处,例如,当准确率较低时,错误元素识别的频率会增加。这凸显了对模型进行更深入比较研究和进一步开发人工智能的必要性,以增强其在支持论证训练中的作用。 关键词:议论文写作;人工智能;自动评估;自然语言处理;网络架构
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Baltic Science Education
Journal of Baltic Science Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
67
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信