PsyScore: Psychometrically-aware framework integrating IRT scoring with ZPD-scaffolded LLM feedback for essay assessment
PsyScore is a new framework for Automated Essay Scoring (AES) that unifies diagnostic assessment and instructional feedback through a shared latent ability representation. It combines a neural Item Response Theory scorer (based on the Graded Partial Credit Model) with a multi-agent LLM feedback generator conditioned on estimated student proficiency, operationalizing Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development. Experiments on the ASAP++ dataset show competitive scoring performance alongside more pedagogically aligned feedback. The work addresses a gap between psychometric rigor and LLM-based adaptive instruction.
Related guides (2)
Related events (8)
Mechanistic analysis of how LLMs encode essay quality in internal representations
Researchers systematically probe the hidden representations of eight LLMs across three essay datasets (ASAP++, CSEE, ENEM) to understand how automated essay scoring (AES) works internally. Using linear probing, dimensionality reduction, and neuron-level analysis, they find essay quality is encoded in a linearly accessible form that emerges progressively across layers and partially transfers across prompts. Individual 'essay scoring neurons' are identified whose activations correlate with scores and respond to targeted interventions, with longer essays relying more on deeper layers. The work contributes to mechanistic interpretability of LLM-based scoring systems.
DEFINED: Data-efficient framework for fine-grained creativity assessment in debate using LLMs
DEFINED is a computational framework for automated creativity assessment in debate scenarios, operationalizing creativity through an eight-dimensional hierarchical metric system implemented via a pretrained autoregressive language model with a hierarchical scoring head. The system addresses data scarcity through constrained data augmentation and mixed-granularity training from limited expert-annotated data. It outperforms prompt-based LLM evaluators and existing debate scoring methods on authentic competition data. The work is relevant to AI evaluation methodology and the broader question of whether LLMs can reliably assess complex human cognitive outputs.
LLM psychological profiles are largely measurement artifacts, not model properties
A new arXiv preprint administers a battery of personality and risk-preference instruments to 56 instruction-tuned LLMs alongside large human reference samples, finding that 81-90% of between-model variation is explained by directional response bias rather than the traits the instruments target. The authors introduce the concept of 'response orthogonality' to explain why some instruments appear more reliable than others, and show that apparent psychological profiles can be manufactured through item selection. The findings challenge the validity of using human-designed psychometric tools to characterize LLMs, with direct implications for safety assessment and the use of LLMs as proxies for human participants in research.
LLUMI: Fine-Tuning Open-Source LLMs for Mental Health Writing Assistance Using Reddit Community Feedback
LLUMI is a two-component system (a generation model and an improvement model) designed to provide mental health writing assistance using smaller open-source LLMs hosted in privacy-preserving, on-premise environments. The system leverages Reddit community endorsement signals (upvotes/downvotes) to construct preference pairs for SFT and DPO training, then further aligns outputs via human evaluation across readability, empathy, connection, actionability, and safety dimensions. Results show LLUMI achieves performance comparable to proprietary GPT-based models on linguistic and human evaluations, suggesting community-derived preference signals can substitute for expensive expert labeling in sensitive domains.
PARL: Preference-Aware Rubric Learning for Personalized LLM Evaluation
This paper introduces PARL (Preference-Aware Rubric Learning), a framework that reframes personalized LLM evaluation as a learning problem rather than static judgment. PARL induces preference-aware evaluation rubrics from raw user interaction histories and uses a discriminative reinforcement learning objective to contrast user-authored responses against model outputs, capturing user-specific decision boundaries. Experiments on personalized text generation tasks show PARL produces high-fidelity rubrics that generalize across users and tasks, outperforming existing LLM-as-a-judge and automatic metric approaches.
PsychoSafe: Framework for Psychologically-Informed LLM Refusals in High-Risk Interactions
Researchers introduce PsychoSafe, a refusal framework that reframes LLM non-compliance as structured supportive communication grounded in evidence-based psychological intervention strategies. The work constructs an 8,019 prompt-response corpus across five risk domains and applies prompting and parameter-efficient fine-tuning to Qwen 3.5 27B, achieving 28.1% improvement in refusal quality over a generic baseline with notable gains in resource referral and psychological grounding. Evaluations on SORRY-Bench and XSTest reveal strong in-domain robustness but limited out-of-domain generalization, pointing to a need for more diverse fine-tuning data. The framework is relevant to safety alignment work targeting crisis, coercion, and escalating-intent scenarios.
EDIT framework trains more rubric-faithful LLM graders via internal-state diagnostics
Researchers introduce Evidence-Diagnosed Intervention Training (EDIT), a two-phase framework for improving LLM-based rubric grading. The first phase (EDIT-SFT) identifies problematic reasoning steps using posterior belief signals and input-grounding scores, then revises only those steps with rubric checklists; the second phase (EDIT-RL) uses belief-guided reward shaping to penalize harmful belief drifts during RL. Experiments on two real-world multi-subject grading benchmarks show consistent improvements over SFT and RL baselines on both in-domain and out-of-domain splits.
Rubric-Conditioned Self-Distillation: structured feedback for reasoning model post-training
A new arXiv preprint proposes Rubric-Conditioned Self-Distillation (RCSD), a post-training framework that replaces scalar reward signals and noisy chain-of-thought annotations with structured rubrics for fine-grained credit assignment. The method conditions a teacher model on criterion-level rubrics to provide token-level guidance on the student's own sampled trajectories, avoiding reliance on a single reference rationale. Evaluated on science reasoning benchmarks, RCSD outperforms GRPO by 1.0 points and OPSD by 0.9 points on average.