AI Ed Researcher

Authors: Huizi Yu, Jiayan Zhou, Lingyao Li, Shan Chen, Jack Gallifant, Anye Shi, Xiang Li, Jingxian He, Wenyue Hua, Mingyu Jin, Guang Chen, Yang Zhou, Zhao Li, Trisha Gupte, Ming-Li Chen, Zahra Azizi, Qi Dou, Bryan P. Yan, Yongfeng Zhang, Yanqiu Xing, Themistocles L. Danielle S. Bitterman, Themistocles L. Assimes, Xin Ma, Lin Lu, Lizhou Fan

Abstract: Background: Simulated patient systems are important in medical education and research, providing safe, integrative training environments and supporting clinical decision making. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI), especially large language models (LLMs), can enhance simulated patients by replicating medical conditions and doctor patient interactions with high fidelity and at low cost, but effectiveness and trustworthiness remain open challenges. Methods: We developed AIPatient, a simulated patient system powered by LLM based AI agents. The system uses a retrieval augmented generation (RAG) framework with six task specific agents for complex reasoning. To improve realism, it is linked to the AIPatient knowledge graph built from de identified real patient data in the MIMIC III intensive care database. Results: We evaluated electronic health record (EHR) based medical question answering (QA), readability, robustness, stability, and user experience. AIPatient reached 94.15 percent QA accuracy when all six agents were enabled, outperforming versions with partial or no agent integration. The knowledge base achieved an F1 score of 0.89. Readability scores showed a median Flesch Reading Ease of 68.77 and a median Flesch Kincaid Grade of 6.4, indicating accessibility for most medical trainees and clinicians. Robustness and stability were supported by non significant variance in repeated trials (analysis of variance F value 0.61, p greater than 0.1; F value 0.78, p greater than 0.1). A user study with medical students showed that AIPatient provides high fidelity, usability, and educational value, comparable to or better than human simulated patients for history taking. Conclusions: LLM based simulated patient systems can deliver accurate, readable, and reliable medical encounters and show strong potential to transform medical education.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.18924

Authors: Thorsten Fröhlich, Tim Schlippe

Abstract: The evaluation of academic theses is a cornerstone of higher education, ensuring rigor and integrity. Traditional methods, though effective, are time-consuming and subject to evaluator variability. This paper presents RubiSCoT, an AI-supported framework designed to enhance thesis evaluation from proposal to final submission. Using advanced natural language processing techniques, including large language models, retrieval-augmented generation, and structured chain-of-thought prompting, RubiSCoT offers a consistent, scalable solution. The framework includes preliminary assessments, multidimensional assessments, content extraction, rubric-based scoring, and detailed reporting. We present the design and implementation of RubiSCoT, discussing its potential to optimize academic assessment processes through consistent, scalable, and transparent evaluation.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.17309

Authors: Thorsten Fröhlich, Tim Schlippe

Abstract: The evaluation of academic theses is a cornerstone of higher education, ensuring rigor and integrity. Traditional methods, though effective, are time-consuming and subject to evaluator variability. This paper presents RubiSCoT, an AI-supported framework designed to enhance thesis evaluation from proposal to final submission. Using advanced natural language processing techniques, including large language models, retrieval-augmented generation, and structured chain-of-thought prompting, RubiSCoT offers a consistent, scalable solution. The framework includes preliminary assessments, multidimensional assessments, content extraction, rubric-based scoring, and detailed reporting. We present the design and implementation of RubiSCoT, discussing its potential to optimize academic assessment processes through consistent, scalable, and transparent evaluation.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.17309

Authors: Xinran Zhu, Cong Wang, Duane Searsmith

Abstract: The growing integration of generative AI in higher education is transforming how students write, learn, and engage with knowledge. As AI tools become more integrated into classrooms, there is an urgent need for pedagogical approaches that help students use them critically and reflectively. This study proposes a pedagogical design that integrates AI and peer feedback in a graduate-level academic writing activity. Over eight weeks, students developed literature review projects through multiple writing and revision stages, receiving feedback from both a custom-built AI reviewer and human peers. We examine two questions: (1) How did students interact with and incorporate AI and peer feedback during the writing process? and (2) How did they reflect on and build relationships with both human and AI reviewers? Data sources include student writing artifacts, AI and peer feedback, AI chat logs, and student reflections. Findings show that students engaged differently with each feedback source-relying on AI for rubric alignment and surface-level edits, and on peer feedback for conceptual development and disciplinary relevance. Reflections revealed evolving relationships with AI, characterized by increasing confidence, strategic use, and critical awareness of its limitations. The pedagogical design supported writing development, AI literacy, and disciplinary understanding. This study offers a scalable pedagogical model for integrating AI into writing instruction and contributes insights for system-level approaches to fostering meaningful human-AI collaboration in higher education.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15750

Authors: Joaquín Jordán, Xavier Yin, Melissa Fabros, Gireeja Ranade, Narges Norouzi

Abstract: Automated Essay Scoring (AES) and Automatic Essay Feedback (AEF) systems aim to reduce the workload of human raters in educational assessment. However, most existing systems prioritize numerical scoring accuracy over feedback quality and are primarily evaluated on pre-secondary school level writing. This paper presents Multi-Agent Argumentation and Grammar Integrated Critiquer (MAGIC), a framework using five specialized agents to evaluate prompt adherence, persuasiveness, organization, vocabulary, and grammar for both holistic scoring and detailed feedback generation. To support evaluation at the college level, we collated a dataset of Graduate Record Examination (GRE) practice essays with expert-evaluated scores and feedback. MAGIC achieves substantial to near-perfect scoring agreement with humans on the GRE data, outperforming baseline LLM models while providing enhanced interpretability through its multi-agent approach. We also compare MAGIC’s feedback generation capabilities against ground truth human feedback and baseline models, finding that MAGIC achieves strong feedback quality and naturalness.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.13037