Don't Count the Edits, Judge by the Outcome Alone: Reward-Based Evaluation for Grammatical Error Correction

Automated assistants for Grammatical Error Correction are now embedded in educational platforms serving millions of learners, yet three critical gaps remain in this domain: (1) latest-generation Large Language Models (LLMs) lack comprehensive evaluation on grammar correction tasks; (2) whether combining these LLMs improves correction quality is unexplored; and (3) the extent to which reference-based metrics underestimate GEC system performance has not been adequately quantified. In this study, first, we evaluate latest-generation LLMs on edit precision, fluency preservation, and meaning retention, showing fine-tuned GPT-4o achieves state-of-the-art performance across all three dimensions. Second, through grammatical error type analysis we demonstrate that individual LLMs exhibit highly similar error correction patterns ($ρ=0.947$). Third, we show that reference-based metrics underestimate GEC performance with 73.76% of GPT-4o corrections different from gold standards being equally valid or even superior. These GEC evaluation findings equip educators with guidance for selecting GEC assistants that enhance rather than constrain student linguistic development. We make our data, code, and models publicly available.

Grammatical error correction using large language models often suffers from the over-correction issue. To mitigate this, we propose a training-free inference method that performs edit-level majority voting over multiple candidates generated by a single model, without requiring model modifications or additional training. Across nine benchmarks covering English, Czech, German, Ukrainian, Korean, Hindi, and Romanian, the proposed method outperforms both greedy and MBR decoding in most cases. Moreover, it yields stable correction quality regardless of the instruction prompts used. We release two repository supporting GEC datasets loading and LLM inference.

Minimal-edit Grammatical Error Correction (GEC) is a challenging task for zero- and few-shot prompted Large Language Models (LLMs), which systematically overcorrect and degrade $F_{0.5}$ by rewriting well-formed spans. While fine-tuning provides an effective solution, it imposes substantial infrastructure demands. We introduce a prompt-based approach that closes the gap to fine-tuned models through three advances in GEC prompting methodology. First, we introduce taxonomy-based instructions to enforce minimal-edit constraints with a comprehensive list of grammatical error rules, equipping the LLM with a bounded, metric-aligned scope of correctable edits, which benefits the strongest models while remaining model-dependent overall. Second, we show that batching multiple uncorrected sentences into a single input context acts as a targeted regularizer against overcorrection, systematically reducing the edit rate across diverse LLM families; we hypothesize this arises from attention dilution effect induced by the bounded capacity of self-attention scores. Finally, LLM-assisted Prompt Optimization refines these instructions. Powered by Gemini 3.1-Pro, our prompt achieves $F_{0.5}=78.32$ on the BEA-2019 test set - establishing a new prompt-based SOTA while shrinking the gap to the fine-tuned single-model SOTA (Staruch et al., 2025) to a mere $0.38$ points. Code, prompts, and outputs are publicly available.