Subhankar Maity

and 2 more

Grammatical error correction (GEC) tools, powered by advanced generative artificial intelligence (AI), competently correct linguistic inaccuracies in user input. However, they often fall short in providing essential natural language explanations, which are crucial for learning languages and gaining a deeper understanding of the grammatical rules. There is limited exploration of these tools in low-resource languages such as Bengali. In such languages, grammatical error explanation (GEE) systems should not only correct sentences but also provide explanations for errors. This comprehensive approach can help language learners in their quest for proficiency. Our work introduces a real-world, multi-domain dataset sourced from Bengali speakers of varying proficiency levels and linguistic complexities. This dataset serves as an evaluation benchmark for GEE systems, allowing them to use context information to generate meaningful explanations and high-quality corrections. Various generative pre-trained large language models (LLMs), including GPT-4 Turbo, GPT-3.5 Turbo, Text-davinci-003, Text-babbage-001, Text-curie-001, Text-ada-001, Llama-2-7b, Llama-2-13b, and Llama-2-70b, are assessed against human experts for performance comparison. Our research underscores the limitations in the automatic deployment of current state-of-the-art generative pre-trained LLMs for Bengali GEE. Advocating for human intervention, our findings propose incorporating manual checks to address grammatical errors and improve feedback quality. This approach presents a more suitable strategy to refine the GEC tools in Bengali, emphasizing the educational aspect of language learning.

Subhankar Maity

and 1 more

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) and generative AI have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP), offering unprecedented capabilities in education. This chapter explores the transformative potential of LLMs in automated question generation and answer assessment. It begins by examining the mechanisms behind LLMs, emphasizing their ability to comprehend and generate human-like text. The chapter then discusses methodologies for creating diverse, contextually relevant questions, enhancing learning through tailored, adaptive strategies. Key prompting techniques, such as zero-shot and chain-ofthought prompting, are evaluated for their effectiveness in generating high-quality questions, including open-ended and multiple-choice formats in various languages. Advanced NLP methods like fine-tuning and prompt-tuning are explored for their role in generating task-specific questions, despite associated costs. The chapter also covers the human evaluation of generated questions, highlighting quality variations across different methods and areas for improvement. Furthermore, it delves into automated answer assessment, demonstrating how LLMs can accurately evaluate responses, provide constructive feedback, and identify nuanced understanding or misconceptions. Examples illustrate both successful assessments and areas needing improvement. The discussion underscores the potential of LLMs to replace costly, time-consuming human assessments when appropriately guided, showcasing their advanced understanding and reasoning capabilities in streamlining educational processes.