Papers › A Unified Neural Network Model for Readability Assessment with Feature Projection and...
A Unified Neural Network Model for Readability Assessment with Feature Projection and Length-Balanced Loss
Wenbiao Li, Ziyang Wang, Yunfang Wu
For readability assessment, traditional methods mainly employ machine learning classifiers with hundreds of linguistic features. Although the deep learning model has become the prominent approach for almost all NLP tasks, it is less explored for readability assessment. In this paper, we propose a BERT-based model with feature projection and length-balanced loss (BERT-FP-LBL) for readability assessment. Specially, we present a new difficulty knowledge guided semi-supervised method to extract topic features to complement the traditional linguistic features. From the linguistic features, we employ projection filtering to extract orthogonal features to supplement BERT representations. Furthermore, we design a new length-balanced loss to handle the greatly varying length distribution of data. Our model achieves state-of-the-art performances on two English benchmark datasets and one dataset of Chinese textbooks, and also achieves the near-perfect accuracy of 99\% on one English dataset. Moreover, our proposed model obtains comparable results with human experts in consistency test.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Text Classification | WeeBit (Readability Assessment) | BERT-FP-LBL | Accuracy (5-fold) | 0.927 | #1 of 5 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections