Advertisement

Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 13, pp 4241–4249 | Cite as

Automatic scoring system for short descriptive answer written in Korean using lexico-semantic pattern

  • Jeong-Eun Kim
  • Kinam Park
  • Jeong-Min Chae
  • Hong-Jun Jang
  • Byoung-Wook Kim
  • Soon-Young Jung
Focus

Abstract

The researches on the automatic scoring system for English descriptive answers have been actively performed, but there are not so many researches on the automatic scoring system for Korean descriptive answers. In this paper, we propose an scoring method based on lexico-semantic pattern (LSP), which is known to be a good solution for the morphologically rich Korean language. In the proposed method, postposition information is utilized as an important tool for finding the meaning differences in Korean. In addition to using LSP, we also applied a synonym dictionary as a meaning extension approach to improve recall performance in scoring student’s answer. Our experimental result shows that the proposed system performs better than the existing noun-keyword-based system by 0.137. Also, the best performance could be obtained by using a synonym dictionary.

Keywords

Lexical semantic pattern Synonym Korean short descriptive answer Automatic scoring 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Special Research Fund of College of Education, Korea University in 2013.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.

References

  1. Burrows S, Gurevych I, Stein B (2015) The eras and trends of automatic short answer grading. Int J Artif Intell Educ 25(1):60–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burstein J, Chodorow M (1999) Automated essay scoring for nonnative English speakers. In: Proceeding ASSESSEVALNLP ’99 proceedings of a symposium on computer mediated language assessment and evaluation in natural language processing, pp 68–75Google Scholar
  3. Bae B-G (2013) Automatic-scoring method for Korean free-text answer through predicate normalization. M.A. dissertation, KookMin UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. Callear D, Jerrams-Smith J, Soh V (2001) CAA of short non-MCQ answers. In: Proceeding of the 5th international CAA conferenceGoogle Scholar
  5. Chakrabartty S, Cauwenberghs G (2007) Gini support vector machine: quadratic entropy based robust multi-class probability regression. J Mach Learn Res 8:813–839zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Cho W, Oh J, Lee J, Kim Y-S (2005) An intelligent marking system based on semantic kernel and Korean WordNet. KIPS Trans Part A 12A(6):539–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clariana RB, Wallace P (2007) A computer-based approach for deriving and measuring individual and team knowledge structure from essay questions. J Educ Comput Res 37(3):211–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cruse DA (1986) Lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Dobrov BV, Loukachevitch NV, Yudina TN (1997) Conceptual indexing using thematic representation of texts. In: TREC-6, pp 403–413Google Scholar
  10. ETRI (2013) ETRI Korean phoneme converter. Speech Language Information Research DepartmentGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacobs PS, Krupka GR, Rau LF (1991) Lexico-semantic pattern matching as a companion to parsing in text understanding. In: Proceeding HLT ’91 proceedings of the workshop on speech and natural language, pp 337–341Google Scholar
  12. Jadidinejad AH, Mahmoudi F (2014) Unsupervised short answer grading using spreading activation over an associative network of concepts. Can J Inf Library Sci 38:287–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jang ES, Kang SS, Noh EH, Kim MH, Sung KH, Seong TJ (2014) KASS: Korean automatic scoring system for short-answer questions. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on computer supported education: CSEDU, Barcelona, Spain, vol 2, pp 226–230Google Scholar
  14. Kim JE, Chae JM, Jung SY (2014) Automatic scoring system based on Korean lexico-semantic pattern. Int J Appl Eng Res 9(22):14499–14510Google Scholar
  15. Loukachevitch NV, Dobrov BV (2002) Evaluation of thesaurus on sociopolitical life as information-retrieval tool. In: Gonzalez Rodriguez M, Paz Suarez Araujo C (eds) The third international conference on linguistic resources and evaluation (LREC-2002), Gran Canaria, Spain, vol 1Google Scholar
  16. Valenti S, Neri F, Cucchiarelli R (2003) An overview of current research on automated essay grading. J Inf Technol Educ 2:319–330Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeong-Eun Kim
    • 1
  • Kinam Park
    • 1
  • Jeong-Min Chae
    • 1
  • Hong-Jun Jang
    • 1
  • Byoung-Wook Kim
    • 1
    • 2
  • Soon-Young Jung
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Creative Informatics & Computing InstituteKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations