Optimization of Intelligent Corpus and Language Writing Teaching Based on Embedded Task Processing System

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Comparison of Chinese writing level of 2 groups before the experiment

Dimension	Experimental group	Control group	t	p
	M±SD	M±SD
Accuracy of words	6.01±1.49	5.98±1.36	0.645	0.825
Discourse fluency	5.93±1.75	5.95±1.83	-0.284	0.776
Article structure	5.15±1.45	5.27±1.63	-0.438	0.794
Textual logic	5.72±1.97	5.88±1.55	-0.305	0.771
Stylized narrative	5.25±1.31	5.04±1.38	0.296	0.868
Writing standards	5.34±1.33	5.22±1.82	0.542	0.872
Subject innovation	6.06±1.72	5.82±1.52	0.687	0.705
Linguistic beauty	5.44±1.60	5.46±1.85	-0.152	0.844
Explicit resolution	5.42±1.33	5.65±1.68	-0.723	0.914
Total	50.32±7.88	50.27±8.27	0.315	0.888

Comparison of Chinese writing level of experimental group before and after experiment

Dimension	Before	After	t	p
	M±SD	M±SD
Accuracy of words	6.01±1.49	9.78±5.13	3.312	0.003
Discourse fluency	5.93±1.75	9.76±5.62	3.548	0.003
Article structure	5.15±1.45	9.48±5.61	4.152	0.002
Textual logic	5.72±1.97	10.46±3.93	4.928	0.002
Stylized narrative	5.25±1.31	10.22±4.44	5.516	0.001
Writing standards	5.34±1.33	9.82±4.60	4.625	0.002
Subject innovation	6.06±1.72	9.24±5.53	2.584	0.004
Linguistic beauty	5.44±1.60	9.66±4.38	3.954	0.003
Explicit resolution	5.42±1.33	10.18±4.40	5.035	0.001
Total	50.32±7.88	88.60±13.52	15.554	0.000

Comparison of Chinese writing level of control group before and after experiment

Dimension	Before	After	t	p
	M±SD	M±SD
Accuracy of words	5.98±1.36	6.95±1.34	1.654	0.734
Discourse fluency	5.95±1.83	6.24±1.62	0.521	0.905
Article structure	5.27±1.63	6.04±1.26	0.985	0.594
Textual logic	5.88±1.55	6.47±1.73	0.745	0.703
Stylized narrative	5.04±1.38	5.92±1.64	1.035	0.685
Writing standards	5.22±1.82	5.65±1.26	0.634	0.763
Subject innovation	5.82±1.52	6.02±1.46	0.312	0.671
Linguistic beauty	5.46±1.85	5.89±1.31	0.642	0.721
Explicit resolution	5.65±1.68	5.83±1.99	0.242	0.584
Total	50.27±8.27	55.01±7.26	3.685	0.807

Comparison of Chinese writing level of 2 groups after the experiment

Dimension	Experimental group	Control group	t	p
	M±SD	M±SD
Accuracy of words	9.78±5.13	6.95±1.34	3.984	0.004
Discourse fluency	9.76±5.62	6.24±1.62	4.956	0.003
Article structure	9.48±5.61	6.04±1.26	4.738	0.003
Textual logic	10.46±3.93	6.47±1.73	5.744	0.002
Stylized narrative	10.22±4.44	5.92±1.64	6.029	0.001
Writing standards	9.82±4.60	5.65±1.26	5.035	0.002
Subject innovation	9.24±5.53	6.02±1.46	4.356	0.003
Linguistic beauty	9.66±4.38	5.89±1.31	4.967	0.003
Explicit resolution	10.18±4.40	5.83±1.99	6.464	0.001
Total	88.60±13.52	55.01±7.26	14.979	0.000

The writing dataset text classification experiment results

Text representation method	Accuracy	Precision	Recall	F1	Rank
DTM	0.683	0.687	0.737	0.870	5
FBOW	0.787	0.863	0.878	0.886	2
LDA	0.811	0.726	0.701	0.881	3
Word2Vec-DTM	0.749	0.882	0.880	0.635	12
P-SIF	0.847	0.794	0.822	0.733	7
Doc2Vec	0.699	0.731	0.651	0.674	11
WME	0.748	0.839	0.813	0.875	4
TextGCN	0.697	0.723	0.761	0.728	8
Attention-BiLSTM	0.716	0.793	0.700	0.726	9
TextCNN	0.870	0.776	0.723	0.691	10
XLNet	0.842	0.770	0.880	0.850	6
Ours	0.908	0.920	0.907	0.896	1