Quiz design is a tedious process that teachers undertake to evaluate the acquisition of knowledge by students. Our goal in this paper is to automate quiz composition from a set of multiple choice questions (MCQs). We formalize a generic sequential decision-making problem with the goal of training an agent to compose a quiz that meets the desired topic coverage and difficulty levels. We investigate DQN, SARSA and A2C/A3C, three reinforcement learning solutions to solve our problem. We run extensive experiments on synthetic and real datasets that study the ability of RL to land on the best quiz. Our results reveal subtle differences in agent behavior and in transfer learning with different data distributions and teacher goals. This was supported by our user study, paving the way for automating various teachers' pedagogical goals.
Figures & tables
Figure 1. MCQs used to generate quizzes.
Dataset
Description
#MCQs
#Topics
#Diff. levels
MeD
generated using MedGemma 9B 1 1 1 For anonymity reasons, we omit citing the original paper. It will be added after acceptance. based on medical documents from the UNESS https://entrainement-ecn.uness.fr/ platform for training medical professionals.
1500+
111 topics from which we sampled 10 topics, e.g., Cardiology, Rhumatology.
The difficulty level of each MCQ has a numerical scale within [1,5] , 1 being the easiest.
Math ( 2 )
collected from MathE https://mathe.ipb.pt/ an e-learning platform for enhancing mathematical skills in higher education and supporting autonomous MCQ-based learning.
1900+
15 topics from which we sampled 10 topics, e.g., Linear Algebra, Probabilities.
The difficulty level of each MCQ on a increasing scale within [1,6] .
Figure 2. Evolution of max Q -function across training iterations of DQN on target Tuniform for different datasets and α values.
Figure 3. Evolution of learned actions per episode during DQN training on target Tuniform for Uniform dataset.
Algos
α
Uniform
BiasedTopic
BiasedLevel
DQN
0
0.896
0.903
0.888
0.25
0.877
0.880
0.885
0.5
0.870
0.870
0.862
0.75
0.868
0.860
0.860
1
0.877
0.851
0.869
Oracle
0
0.998
0.997
1.000
Table 3. Average similarity with target Tuniform for all Synthetic datasets.
Figure 4. Evolution of learned actions per episode during DQN training on target Tbias for Uniform dataset.
Figure 5. Examples of agent trajectories in Uniform dataset using UMAP 2D projection.
Data
Algos
α
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
MeD
DQN
0.918
0.878
0.871
0.860
0.893
SARSA
0.911
0.880
0.876
0.870
0.852
A2C
0.907
0.877
0.869
0.861
0.886
A3C
0.910
0.880
0.869
0.866
0.899
Oracle
1.000
0.978
0.977
0.988
1.000
Table 4. Average similarity with target for all agents in real datasets when finding Tuniform .
Data
Algos
# Iterations
Time (sec)
MeD
DQN
20
0.04
SARSA
29
0.07
A2C
25
0.05
A3C
17
0.04
Oracle
10000
5.22
Math
DQN
31
0.07
Table 5. Average #iterations and time to find target Tuniform .
Figure 6. Evolution of number of iterations and similarity to target based on reward threshold for MeD dataset.
Training target
Inference target
Algos
Similarity w/target
#Iter
Tuniform
Tbias
DQN
0.756
100
SARSA
0.791
100
A2C
0.800
83
A3C
0.775
95
Oracle
0.888
10000
Tbias
Tuniform
DQN
0.866
24
Table 6. Average similarity and # Iter (iterations) for transferring the learning of agents across targets on Math with α=0.5 .
Training data
Inference data
Algos
Similarity w/target
#Iter
MeD
Math
DQN
0.877
12
SARSA
0.881
8
A2C
0.865
16
A3C
0.864
11
Oracle
0.956
10000
Math
MeD
DQN
0.868
20
Table 7. Average similarity and # Iter (Iterations) for transferring the learning of agents across datasets on Tuniform with α=0.5 .
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 7. Projection of high-dimensional states in 2D with UMAP: a) Uniform dataset with α=0.5 ; b) BiasedTopic dataset with α=1 ; c) BiasedLevel dataset with α=0 .
Figure 8. Evolution of topicMatch and diffMatch across training episodes of DQN on target Tuniform for Uniform dataset, with smoothing window of size 100.
Figure 9. Examples of agent trajectories in Uniform dataset using UMAP 2D projection following reward R1 (direct similarity reward); the colors of the agent trajectory represent the inference timeline, where time shifts from lighter to darker colors.
Figure 10. Examples of agent trajectories in Uniform dataset using UMAP 2D projection following reward R2 (progress-based reward).
Figure 11. Examples of agent trajectories in Uniform dataset using 2D projection with topicMatch and diffMatch following reward R1 (direct similarity reward).
Figure 12. Examples of agent trajectories in Uniform dataset using 2D projection with topicMatch and diffMatch following reward R2 (progress-based reward).
Reinforcement learning studies how agents learn sequential decisions from rewards and interaction, balancing exploration, performance, safety, and adaptation.
Rubric-based RL is a promising route for extending reinforcement learning beyond verifiable rewards, yet existing methods optimize rubrics while treating the query distribution as fixed. We identify a structural bottleneck: rubric quality is constrained by query structure. Open-ended queries yield vague rubrics; naively narrowing them introduces fabricated references that no model can verify, so all responses fail and training receives no reward signal. We present QUBRIC, a framework that co-designs queries and rubrics. Teacher-derived key points ground the rewriting of open-ended queries into scenario-based, evaluable questions. Contrastive rubric generation then turns teacher-policy gaps into query-level criteria, and learnability filtering retains only informative query-rubric pairs for GRPO training. QUBRIC achieves a +5.5 point gain on ArenaHard over the SFT baseline. Trained only on instruction-following data, it further transfers to three held-out benchmarks spanning legal, moral, and narrative reasoning (+6.3 points on average), with improvements concentrated in reasoning-related dimensions. These results provide evidence that co-designing queries and rubrics can make rubric-based RL a practical complement to RLVR beyond strictly verifiable tasks.
The 20 Questions (Q20) game is a well known game which encourages deductive reasoning and creativity. In the game, the answerer first thinks of an object such as a famous person or a kind of animal. Then the questioner tries to guess the object by asking 20 questions. In a Q20 game system, the user is considered as the answerer while the system itself acts as the questioner which requires a good strategy of question selection to figure out the correct object and win the game. However, the optimal policy of question selection is hard to be derived due to the complexity and volatility of the game environment. In this paper, we propose a novel policy-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) method, which enables the questioner agent to learn the optimal policy of question selection through continuous interactions with users. To facilitate training, we also propose to use a reward network to estimate the more informative reward. Compared to previous methods, our RL method is robust to noisy answers and does not rely on the Knowledge Base of objects. Experimental results show that our RL method clearly outperforms an entropy-based engineering system and has competitive performance in a noisy-free simulation environment.
Huang Hu, Xianchao Wu, Bingfeng Luo +4
1Peking University, Beijing, China · 3Microsoft Development Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan · 2Microsoft Corporation, Beijing, China
Automatic Question Difficulty Estimation (AQDE) holds growing promise for educational assessment because it has the potential to yield difficulty estimates that are competitive with expert judgment, while helping reduce the time and financial burden associated with pilot administrations and scaling to digital testing contexts. Prior AQDE studies report mixed evidence on whether adding distractors as additional text to the question stem and the correct key consistently improves difficulty prediction. We hypothesize that the effectiveness of distractor information depends on its structural representation, and that explicitly modeling distractors as separate components improves difficulty estimation over baselines that omit this information. To address this, we designed controlled architectures that model MCQ components as distinct inputs to isolate the contribution of distractor content and order. Specifically, we represented distractors by encoding each distractor as its own text input and aggregating their representations either with order-aware concatenation (with positional tags) or with an order-invariant summation. We evaluated these architectures using two Chilean datasets (Natural and Social Sciences, 2016-2020; 4,114 multiple-choice questions). Compared to a simpler model that only used the question stem and the key, our best distractor-aware architecture achieved higher predictive performance, reaching R^2 = 0.83 for Natural Sciences and R^2 = 0.71 for Social Sciences items. An order-invariant variant achieved nearly the same accuracy with approximately half as many parameters, offering a favorable accuracy-efficiency trade-off. These results show that structural information (especially distractor content) drives gains in predictive accuracy, supporting the development of efficient, structure-aware models that are computationally viable for large-scale educational applications.
Gabriel Ortega, Abelino Jiménez, Séverin Lions +1
Centro de Investigación Avanzada en Educación (CIAE) Instituto de Estudios Avanzados en Educación (IE) Universidad de Chile. · Departamento de Evaluación Medición y Registro Educacional (DEMRE) Universidad de Chile. · Centro de Modelamiento Matemático (CMM) Universidad de Chile. +1