ArticleJournal of imaging2025
Unsupervised Optical Mark Recognition on Answer Sheets for Massive Printed Multiple-Choice Tests.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The large-scale evaluation of multiple-choice tests is a challenging task from the perspective of image processing. A typical instrument is a multiple-choice question test that employs an answer sheet with circles or squares. Once students have finished the test, the answer sheets are digitized and sent to a processing center for scoring. Operators compute each exam score manually, but this task requires considerable time. While it is true that mature algorithms exist for detecting circles under controlled conditions, they may fail in real-life applications, even when using controlled conditions for image acquisition of the answer sheets. This paper proposes a desktop application for optical mark recognition (OMR) on the scanned multiple-choice question (MCQ) test answer sheets. First, we compiled a set of answer sheet images corresponding to 6029 exams (totaling 564,040 four-option answers) applied in 2024 in Tamaulipas, Mexico. Subsequently, we developed an image-processing module that extracts answers from the answer sheets and an interface for operators to perform analysis by selecting the folder containing the exams and generating results in a tabulated format. We evaluated the image-processing module, achieving a percentage of 96.15% of exams graded without error and 99.95% of 4-option answers classified correctly. We obtained these percentages by comparing the answers generated through our system with those generated by human operators, who took an average of 2 min to produce the answers for a single answer sheet, while the automated version took an average of 1.04 s.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.