Language Proficiency Assessment from Eye Movements in Naturalistic Passage Reading

Standard language proficiency tests rely on linguistic tasks such as vocabulary, grammar and reading comprehension quizzes. An alternative, cognitively motivated approach, introduced in Berzak et al. (2018), proposed instead to predict language proficiency from behavioral traces of eye movements in reading. In this work, we validate and extend this approach from single sentences to more naturalistic reading of contextualized passages in English as a second language, new proficiency measures, prediction models, and reading in an information seeking regime. We find that the approach is effective in all these evaluations. We further address two key open questions on eye movement based proficiency testing: (1) potential scoring biases that reflect the proximity of the reader's native language to English, which may undermine validity, and (2) its reliability. We find that eye movement based proficiency scores are indeed biased towards L1s that are linguistically closer to English. We propose a score debiasing method which effectively remedies this issue. The reliability analyses suggest that eye movement proficiency scores are more reliable than standard language proficiency scores. Overall, our results strengthen and broaden the empirical foundations for future eye movement based language assessment technologies.

A Dual-Dimensional LLM Framework for Automated Item Incidental Content Similarity Analysis in Large-Scale Assessments

The rapid expansion of large-scale assessments and the growing adoption of automatic item generation have intensified concerns about incidental content redundancy, where construct-irrelevant elements such as wording or contextual framing become unintentionally repetitive across items. Traditional similarity metrics like BLEU or cosine similarity, often fail to capture the nuanced structural and semantic layers that drive perceived redundancy simultaneously. This study proposes a dual-dimensional framework for Automated Item Similarity Analysis (AISA) powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), operationalizing similarity through Structured Decomposition and Semantic Relatedness. Psychometric validation indicates that LLM-derived metrics align more closely with indicators of construct-irrelevant local dependence and yield more coherent item parameter groupings than traditional text-based measures. The framework is further evaluated through its application in Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT). Simulations reveal that incorporating LLM-based similarity constraints into item selection improves estimation stability and reduces bias with minimal efficiency trade-offs, outperforming constraints based on conventional metrics. These findings highlight the potential of LLM-powered AISA to support scalable bank curation, content-aware test assembly, and experience-sensitive adaptive testing across diverse assessment contexts.

Interpretable Humans, Alien LLMs: Expert Analysis of Latent Structures in Assessment Responses

The evaluation of large language models (LLMs) relies heavily on human-designed assessments, implicitly assuming that AI and humans employ similar underlying cognitive constructs. Challenging this assumption, we investigate whether the latent factors governing LLM performance carry the same substantive, human-interpretable meaning as the cognitive constructs governing human learners. Using responses from humans and six LLMs across quantitative reasoning and chemistry assessments, we conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) separately for both groups. Subject-Matter Experts (SMEs) then blindly evaluated the resulting factor graphs to ascribe pedagogical meaning to the emerged constructs. SMEs successfully interpreted most of the human-derived factors. Conversely, they could not ascribe meaning to any LLM-derived factors in quantitative reasoning and interpreted only half of the LLM factors in chemistry. By combining data-driven EFA with blind expert interpretation, this framework shows that LLMs frequently operate on statistically opaque mechanisms distinct from human reasoning.

Multilingual Sentence Embeddings for Linguistic-Integrated Reliability Audit

Multilingual assessment systems commonly rely on translation for scoring and quality-control processes. We evaluate whether multilingual sentence embeddings can replace translated English input for Linguistic-Integrated Reliability Auditing (LiRA) across 11 PIRLS constructed-response items and three embedding models. Native-language embeddings reproduced translation-based reliability estimates closely while recovering responses excluded after translation failure, with no meaningful change in reliability.