Evidence record 16119 · automatically gathered

Comparative Validation of GPT-4o-mini and Teacher Mean Scores for Automated Scoring of Music Analysis Responses: Single-Pass Deployment, Repeatability, and Strategy-Specific Bias

Scoring open-ended music analysis responses is time-consuming and requires nuanced judgments of harmonic knowledge and formal understanding. This study evaluates the validity and repeatability of GPT-4o-mini for rubric-based scoring of music analysis essays, using teacher mean scores as the benchmark. A dataset of 300 university-level student responses was scored by teachers on four dimensions: Harmony, Form, Reasoning, and Terminology. GPT-4o-mini scored the same responses using three prompting

Record details

Published: 3 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.HC
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Children & education
Retrieved: 4 August 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (3 August 2026), “Comparative Validation of GPT-4o-mini and Teacher Mean Scores for Automated Scoring of Music Analysis Responses: Single-Pass Deployment, Repeatability, and Strategy-Specific Bias,” evidence record 16119, https://ethics.ai/record/16119 (originally published by arXiv cs.HC).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.