0

Automated Textbook Auditing with Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Ensuring the quality of educational materials requires more than standard proofreading: textbooks must be audited for factual accuracy, domain-specific technical correctness, and linguistic quality simultaneously -- a task that general-purpose grammar checkers cannot address.

Preview
Year
2026
Hosting
Excerpt onlyCC-BY-NC-SA-4.0

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2607.11276CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

Ensuring the quality of educational materials requires more than standard proofreading: textbooks must be audited for factual accuracy, domain-specific technical correctness, and linguistic quality simultaneously -- a task that general-purpose grammar checkers cannot address. We present AI Textbook Auditor, a modular multi-agent pipeline for automated quality assurance of educational materials across subject domains. The system accepts a textbook PDF and produces a structured, human-reviewable report via two analysis tracks: a Factual and Technical Track in which an ensemble of specialized LLM agents detects factual inaccuracies, code errors, incorrect definitions, and conceptual inconsistencies, augmented with web search for humanities domains; and a Grammar Track operating PDF-natively to preserve diacritical encoding. A Judge Agent filters false positives using domain-specific rules before presenting findings to a human reviewer. The pipeline supports two ingestion modes -- vision-native page rendering and PyMuPDF text extraction -- and is domain-adaptable via custom prompts encoding subject-specific error taxonomies. We demonstrate the system on two Romanian upper-secondary textbooks: a CS textbook (56 technical findings across seven categories, with an expert-validated precision of 62.5%) and a history and social sciences textbook (72 findings spanning factual errors, ideological bias, and grammar). The system is designed as a triage tool that reduces the manual effort of locating candidate issues, with human expert validation required before any editorial action.