Observational analysis assesses readability in Russian educational materials, indicating LLMs may enhance text simplification.
This study aims to assess the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly GPT-4o, to evaluate and modify the complexity level of Russian school textbooks. We lay the groundwork for developing scalable, context-aware methods for readability assessment and text simplification in Russian educational materials, areas where traditional formulas often fall short. Using a corpus of 154 textbooks covering various subjects and grade levels, we evaluate the extent to which LLMs accurately predict the appropriate comprehension level of a text and how well they simplify texts by targeted grade reduction. Our evaluation framework employs GPT-4o as a multi-role agent in three distinct experiments. First, we prompt the model to estimate the target comprehension age for each segment and identify five key linguistic or conceptual features underpinning its assessment. Second, we simulate student comprehension by instructing the model to reason step-by-step through whether the text is understandable for a hypothetical student of the given grade. Third, we examine the model’s ability to simplify selected fragments by reducing their complexity by three grade levels. We further measure model perplexity and output token probabilities to probe the prediction confidence and coherence. Results indicate that while LLMs show considerable potential in complexity assessment (i.e., MAE of 1 grade level), they tend to overestimate text difficulty and face challenges in achieving precise simplification levels. Ease of understanding assessments generally align with human expectations, although texts with abstract, technical, or poetic content (e.g., Physics, History, and Literary Russian) pose challenges. Our study concludes that LLMs can substantially complement traditional readability metrics and assist teachers in developing suitable Russian educational materials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paraschiv et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: