Can LLMs Estimate Cognitive Complexity of Reading Comprehension Items?

Seonjeong Hwang, Hyounghun Kim, Gary Geunbae Lee
10/29/2025
cs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Estimating the cognitive complexity of reading comprehension (RC) items is crucial for assessing item difficulty before it is administered to learners. Unlike syntactic and semantic features, such as passage length or semantic similarity between options, cognitive features that arise during answer reasoning are not readily extractable using existing NLP tools and have traditionally relied on human annotation. In this study, we examine whether large language models (LLMs) can estimate the cognitive complexity of RC items by focusing on two dimensions-Evidence Scope and Transformation Level-that indicate the degree of cognitive burden involved in reasoning about the answer. Our experimental results demonstrate that LLMs can approximate the cognitive complexity of items, indicating their potential as tools for prior difficulty analysis. Further analysis reveals a gap between LLMs' reasoning ability and their metacognitive awareness: even when they produce correct answers, they sometimes fail to correctly identify the features underlying their own reasoning process.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{hwang2025llms,
  title  = {Can LLMs Estimate Cognitive Complexity of Reading Comprehension Items?},
  author = {Seonjeong Hwang and Hyounghun Kim and Gary Geunbae Lee},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2510.25064},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.25064v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2510.25064.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2510.25064)

Discussion