# Large Scale AI Grading of Handwritten Physics Assessments: Score Agreement and Olympiad Team Selection Outcomes

Preprint · Praveen Pathak, Siddharth Tiwary, Charudatt Kadolkar, Vijay Singh, David Rakestraw, Shirish Pathare, Anwesh Mazumdar

- Archive id: arxiv:2608.20521
- Published: 2026-08-20
- arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20521
- Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20521
- PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.20521
- Provenance: arxiv

## Abstract

Multimodal AI can read handwritten physics solutions, but high-stakes grading requires agreement with official scores and outcomes. This study evaluated GPT-5.5-based grading on 10364 scanned pages from 520 handwritten submissions by 416 unique candidates or students across three assessments: a national Physics Olympiad theory examination, the final Olympiad selection camp with theory and experiment components, and a university quantum-mechanics examination. Each submission was graded twice by AI using the official rubrics. The second round used revised page-by-page and evidence-location instructions developed after first-round disagreement analysis. During grading, AI did not see official human marks or AI--human comparisons. Total-score correlations with official marks were high (0.91--0.97). For the final Olympiad selection, AI recovered the same five-student team as official grading. The second round improved aggregate question-part agreement, especially where first-round disagreements were larger. The main difficulty remained exact partial-credit grading, especially in experimental work. Reliable AI grading therefore depends on detailed rubrics and should be used as a second reader or audit tool under examiner control.

_Abstract reproduced under CC0-1.0 (arXiv descriptive metadata)._

---
Space Kitty Archive · https://space-kitty.com · API: https://space-kitty.com/api/v1 · MCP: https://space-kitty.com/mcp · Premium: $0.20/request via x402 (Base Sepolia (testnet)). Metadata: arXiv (CC0), OpenAlex (CC0), Europe PMC (CC BY/CC0 works), ClinicalTrials.gov.