Where LLM Graders Succeed and Break: Evidence from Two Computer-Science Exams
cs.CL, cs.AI, cs.CY
Submitted: 2026-09-24
Updated: 2026-09-24
Code: https://github.com/KAUST-Academy/where-llm-graders-succeed-and-break
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: One long-form exam in a large course costs hundreds of grader-hours, and qualified graders are scarce; LLM graders are a tempting alternative.
Terminology
Abstract
One long-form exam in a large course costs hundreds of grader-hours, and qualified graders are scarce; LLM graders are a tempting alternative. To show its pitfalls we grade a practical Computer Vision exam (570 dual-graded students) under 171 configurations spanning closed and open-weights models; the best reaches mean absolute error 1.64/35, below the 2.61/35 two human graders achieve against each other. The catch is the prompt: a short ''strict grader'' preamble drives 14 of 17 open-weights models out of the graded band (MAE 8), three stopping grading altogether. The damage traces to the preamble's two credit-withholding sentences, not to tone or model scale; one of them, ''never give partial credit'', alone makes two of three probed models stop grading. The closed flagships of three vendors shift calibration under it but stay in the band. In 162 further configurations on a second, independent Machine Learning exam from another course (1, 038 dual-graded students), the preamble worsens ten models, moving three out of the band into collapse and one into refusal, yet improves seven whose neutral prompts over-mark: the vulnerability replicates, but its direction is exam-specific. Light LoRA fine-tuning repairs it: one adapter on the two exams' pooled about 3, 900 graded examples brings five small open models to parity or better with a human grader in agreement with the grader pair, and sensitivity to the three harsh personas nearly vanishes (0.32 MAE). We release the anonymised dataset, full ablation grid, and grading, fine-tuning and analysis pipelines.
Sources
- Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models
- Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities
- Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Report
- Qwen3 Technical Report
- The Llama 3 Herd of Models
- Gemma 4 Technical Report
- Qwen2.5 Technical Report
- ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Tools
- GLM-4.5: Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding (ARC) Foundation Models
- Gemma 3 Technical Report
- DeepSeek-Coder-V2: Breaking the Barrier of Closed-Source Models in Code Intelligence
Related papers
- Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving
- Ishigaki-IDS-Bench: A Benchmark for Generating Information Delivery Specification from BIM Information Requirements
- Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signals
- MedStruct-S: A Benchmark for Key Discovery, Key-Conditioned QA and Semi-Structured Extraction from OCR Clinical Reports
- The End of Transformers? On Challenging Attention and the Rise of Sub-Quadratic Architectures
- Untangling the Mechanisms of Misleading Context in Medical Question Answering