We propose a refined alignment-based method to assess end-to-end grammatical error correction (GEC) systems, aiming to reproduce and improve results from existing evaluation tools, such as errant, even when applied to raw text input—reflecting real-world language learners’ writing scenarios. Our approach addresses challenges arising from sentence boundary detection deviations in text preprocessing, a factor overlooked by current GEC evaluation metrics. We demonstrate its effectiveness by replicating results through a re-implementation of errant, utilizing stanza for error annotation and simulating end-to-end evaluation from raw text. Additionally, we propose a potential multilingual errant, presenting Chinese and Korean GEC results. Previously, Chinese and Korean errant were implemented independently for each language, with different annotation formats. Our approach generates consistent error annotations across languages, establishing a basis for standardized grammatical error annotation and evaluation in multilingual GEC contexts.

Comprehensive error annotation is essential for developing effective Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) systems and delivering meaningful feedback to learners. This paper introduces improvements to automatic grammatical error annotation for Chinese. Our refined framework addresses language-specific challenges that cause common spelling errors in Chinese, including pronunciation similarity, visual shape similarity, specialized participles, and word ordering. In a case study, we demonstrated our system’s ability to provide detailed feedback on 12-16% of all errors by identifying them under our new error typology, specific enough to uncover subtle differences in error patterns between L1 and L2 writings. In addition to improving automated feedback for writers, this work also highlights the value of incorporating language-specific features in NLP systems.

This paper proposes an analysis of prompting strategies for grammatical error correction (GEC) with selected large language models (LLM) based on language proficiency. GEC using generative LLMs has been known for overcorrection where results obtain higher recall measures than precision measures. The writing examples of English language learners may be different from those of native speakers. Given that there is a significant differences in second language (L2) learners’ error types by their proficiency levels, this paper attempts to reduce overcorrection by examining the interaction between LLM’s performance and L2 language proficiency. Our method focuses on zero-shot and few-shot prompting and fine-tuning models for GEC for learners of English as a foreign language based on the different proficiency. We investigate GEC results and find that overcorrection happens primarily in advanced language learners’ writing (proficiency C) rather than proficiency A (a beginner level) and proficiency B (an intermediate level). Fine-tuned LLMs, and even few-shot prompting with writing examples of English learners, actually tend to exhibit decreased recall measures. To make our claim concrete, we conduct a comprehensive examination of GEC outcomes and their evaluation results based on language proficiency.

The quantity and quality of training data plays a crucial role in grammatical error correction (GEC). However, due to the fact that obtaining human-annotated GEC data is both time-consuming and expensive, several studies have focused on generating artificial error sentences to boost training data for grammatical error correction, and shown significantly better performance. The present study explores how fluency filtering can affect the quality of artificial errors. By comparing artificial data filtered by different levels of fluency, we find that artificial error sentences with low fluency can greatly facilitate error correction, while high fluency errors introduce more noise.

In this paper, we explore two approaches of generating error-focused phrases and examine whether these phrases can lead to better performance in grammatical error correction for the restricted track of BEA 2019 Shared Task on GEC. Our results show that phrases directly extracted from GEC corpora outperform phrases from statistical machine translation phrase table by a large margin. Appending error+context phrases to the original GEC corpora yields comparably high precision. We also explore the generation of artificial syntactic error sentences using error+context phrases for the unrestricted track. The additional training data greatly facilitates syntactic error correction (e.g., verb form) and contributes to better overall performance.