Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 1 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 2 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 2 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
| Automation | 2 |
| Multiple Choice Tests | 2 |
| Natural Language Processing | 2 |
| Accuracy | 1 |
| Artificial Intelligence | 1 |
| Attention | 1 |
| Computer Assisted Testing | 1 |
| Documentation | 1 |
| Efficiency | 1 |
| Inferences | 1 |
| Misconceptions | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Grantee Submission | 2 |
Author
| Andreea Dutulescu | 2 |
| Danielle S. McNamara | 2 |
| Denis Iorga | 2 |
| Mihai Dascalu | 2 |
| Stefan Ruseti | 2 |
Publication Type
| Reports - Research | 2 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 2 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Andreea Dutulescu; Stefan Ruseti; Denis Iorga; Mihai Dascalu; Danielle S. McNamara – Grantee Submission, 2024
The process of generating challenging and appropriate distractors for multiple-choice questions is a complex and time-consuming task. Existing methods for an automated generation have limitations in proposing challenging distractors, or they fail to effectively filter out incorrect choices that closely resemble the correct answer, share synonymous…
Descriptors: Multiple Choice Tests, Artificial Intelligence, Attention, Natural Language Processing
Andreea Dutulescu; Stefan Ruseti; Denis Iorga; Mihai Dascalu; Danielle S. McNamara – Grantee Submission, 2025
Automated multiple-choice question (MCQ) generation is valuable for scalable assessment and enhanced learning experiences. How-ever, existing MCQ generation methods face challenges in ensuring plausible distractors and maintaining answer consistency. This paper intro-duces a method for MCQ generation that integrates reasoning-based explanations…
Descriptors: Automation, Computer Assisted Testing, Multiple Choice Tests, Natural Language Processing

Peer reviewed
Direct link
