Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Sketch2Feedback: A Grammar-In-The-Loop Framework For Rubric-Aligned Feedback On Student Stem Diagrams

Authors
Aayam Bansal
Date
Publisher
arXiv
Providing timely, rubric-aligned feedback on student-drawn diagrams is a persistent challenge in STEM education. While large multimodal models (LMMs) can jointly parse images and generate explanations, their tendency to hallucinate undermines trust in classroom deployments. We present Sketch2Feedback, a grammar-in-the-loop framework that decomposes the problem into four stages -- hybrid perception, symbolic graph construction, constraint checking, and constrained VLM feedback -- so that the language model verbalizes only violations verified by an upstream rule engine. We evaluate on two synthetic micro-benchmarks, FBD-10 (free-body diagrams) and Circuit-10 (circuit schematics), each with 500 images spanning standard and hard noise augmentation tiers, comparing our pipeline against end-to-end LMMs (LLaVA-1.5-7B, Qwen2-VL-7B), a vision-only detector, a YOLOv8-nano learned detector, and an ensemble oracle. On n=100 test samples per benchmark with 95% bootstrap CIs, results are mixed and instructive: Qwen2-VL-7B achieves the highest micro-F1 on both FBDs (0.570) and circuits (0.528), but with extreme hallucination rates (0.78, 0.98). An ensemble oracle that selects the best prediction per sample reaches F1=0.556 with hallucination 0.320 on FBDs, demonstrating exploitable complementarity between grammar and end-to-end approaches. Confidence thresholding at tau=0.7 reduces circuit hallucination from 0.970 to 0.880 with no F1 loss. Hard noise augmentation reveals domain-dependent robustness: FBD detection is resilient while circuit detection degrades sharply. An LLM-as-judge evaluation confirms that the grammar pipeline produces more actionable circuit feedback (4.85/5) than the end-to-end LMM (3.11/5). We release all code, datasets, and evaluation scripts.
What is the application?
Who is the user?