AI 与写作2018npr.org
越来越多州采用计算机“机器阅卷”评改学生作文
More States Opting to 'Robo-Grade' Student Essays by Computer
导读
这篇 NPR 报道讲美国多州开始用计算机自动评分学生作文，以及这套系统多么容易被糊弄（写满一页字母 b 也能拿高分、复制粘贴凑段落、堆砌长引用）。对写作者的价值在于反向提醒：机器评分奖励的是可识别的表面特征，而不是真正的论证与思考；知道规则如何被钻空子，也能帮你看清什么是真正的好写作。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
警惕“形式合规”陷阱：凑够五段、堆砌引用、复制粘贴同一段，都能骗过机器，但骗不过真正的读者——写作的目标应是论证本身。
- 02
机器能识别的只是表层特征（句式、词汇、结构信号），真正的思想深度和逻辑连贯仍需人来判断，别把评分等同于质量。
- 03
任何评分系统一旦规则公开，就会被应试产业逆向破解；写作时要想清楚自己是在“打游戏”还是在表达。
- 04
评分方式会影响写作心态：知道文字根本没人读，会直接摧毁写作动机——这也说明读者意识对写作有多重要。
HN 评论精选
机器评分极易被表面特征糊弄，NLP 的实际能力被严重夸大。
作者引用报道中的例子：有学生整页只写字母“b”却拿到不错的分数；有人写一段好段落再复制四遍凑成五段文；还有人靠堆砌原文长引用或复述题目来蒙混过关。评论者作为 NLP 从业者指出，这门技术远没到位——连判断一条影评是正面还是负面都很吃力，怎么可能给整篇作文打分？他批评业内夸大能力，制造注定落空的期待，最终拖累整个领域。
thomasahle查看英文原文
> Developers of so-called “robo-graders” say they understand why many students and teachers would be skeptical of the idea. But they insist, with computers already doing jobs as complicated and as fraught as driving cars, detecting cancer, and carrying on conversations, they can certainly handle grading students’ essays. > One year, she says, a student who wrote a whole page of the letter “b” ended up with a good score. Other students have figured out that they could do well writing one really good paragraph and just copying that four times to make a five-paragraph essay that scores well. Others have pulled one over on the computer by padding their essays with long quotes from the text they’re supposed to analyze, or from the question they’re supposed to answer. The science is just not nearly there yet. We can barely determine the sentiment of IMDB reviews. How should we be able to grade an entire essay? Working in NLP, it really bugs me when people overstate what can be done like this. It creates massive expectations that are bound to fail, and then the entire field suffers.
用标准化分数和机器打分决定人的命运本身就荒谬，面试式的真人评估更可靠。
评论者对比英美招生：申请剑桥（英国那个）时，会有正式的剑桥教职人员花很长时间和你面谈，本科申请也一样；而美国靠 SAT/GRE 这类由人工甚至机器打分的考试，分数不够就直接被好学校拒之门外。他 GRE 成绩不好，美国一所学校都没给 offer，最后只有剑桥要他——而剑桥常年在国际排名前列。他在剑桥拿到 NLP 博士，因此更能确认“用 NLP 给作文打分”这个想法有多荒谬。
stakhanov查看英文原文
If you apply to study at the University of Cambridge (UK, not Boston), an actual faculty member (not a teaching assistant or anything like that) of the University of Cambridge (not some lesser institution) will take the time to sit down with you for an extended period of time for an interview, even for undergraduates (for graduates, it goes without saying). That courtesy is extended to a boatload of applicants who make that final stage, and the stages before that certainly don't involve robo-grading. In the U.S., you take the SAT or GRE or whatever which gets graded by a mechanical turk or even an actual machine. And even the good colleges don't have the good sense to ignore the thing (the exception being MIT, at least back when I applied there, where stating your GRE score was optional when you applied as a grad). So a less than astronomical score will immediately make it impossible to get into any decent college. That system is f*cked up. For me that meant that the only university that would have me also happened to be the university that routinely scores first or second place in international university rankings, that university being Cambridge. And I didn't get a single offer from the US because of a bad GRE score. After getting my doctorate in NLP there, I can attest to how fucked up the idea actually is, that you can score essays using NLP.
机器评分可被培训产业逆向破解，而人工评分同样奖励公式化写作。
这套系统很容易被钻空子，尤其是当你了解背后的模型时。运营方大概不会公开细节，但背后有庞大的考试培训产业，只要花钱就能买到“破解系统”的攻略。不过话说回来，人工评分的 SAT 写作同样可笑——他十年前考试时的所有高分范文都高度公式化，奖励的正是那些投入时间“玩游戏”的人。
albntomat0查看英文原文
This seems easy to game, especially if you have any insight into the model behind the grading. I doubt that those running it will release any specifics, but with a large industry[0] behind test prep, general guidance on how to beat the system will be available for those who can pay for it. That said, the SAT writing section was equally silly when graded by humans. All of the examples of what a good score looked like (per when I took it ~10 years ago) were highly formulaic, rewarding those who invested in played the game. [0]: https://www.quora.com/How-big-is-the-SAT-test-prep-market
无人阅读的评分方式会打击写作者的积极性，这一点被忽视了。
让我意外的是，报道完全没提士气问题：当你得知自己的答案根本不会被任何人读到，会是什么感受？
lozenge查看英文原文
I'm surprised they didn't even mention the morale issues. How will it feel to know your answer isn't even going to be read by a person?
同类还值得读
我是肯尼亚人：不是我把 ChatGPT 写成了我，而是它写起来像我
I'm Kenyan. I don't write like ChatGPT, ChatGPT writes like me
一位肯尼亚作者反驳“我写得太像 AI”的指责：不是他写得像 ChatGPT，而是 ChatGPT 写得像他——那种平滑、无地域色彩、貌似中立的英语，本来就是殖民教育与精英阶层塑造…
AI 与写作2025 · 799 分 · 504 评4 条写作要点编辑精选使用 AI 助手完成论文写作任务会累积认知债务
Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing task
这篇论文研究的是：在完成议论文写作任务时使用 AI 助手，是否会让写作者积累"认知债"——也就是把本应由自己承担的思考外包出去，短期省力、长期削弱写作与思考能力。
AI 与写作2025 · 391 分 · 426 评4 条写作要点编辑精选学生使用 ChatGPT 写作指南
A Student's Guide to Writing with ChatGPT
这是 OpenAI 面向学生的一份写作指南，讲的是如何把 ChatGPT 用作写作过程中的辅助工具，而不是替你写完作业的"枪手"。
AI 与写作2024 · 323 分 · 309 评4 条写作要点编辑精选Grammarly，你也背叛了我？
Et Tu, Grammarly?
本次输入里只给了标题和链接，正文和评论都是空的，所以没法据实写出导读。
AI 与写作2025 · 279 分 · 74 评编辑精选用 GPT-3 进行创意小说写作
GPT-3 Creative Fiction
Gwern 的长文系统考察 GPT-3 在创意小说写作上的能力与边界：它能维持人设、写出讽刺腔调，也会整段复述训练数据里的歌词。
AI 与写作2020 · 234 分 · 97 评4 条写作要点编辑精选