## 5 Conclusions  
According to the present analysis, the most balanced method in terms of the assessed Complexity, Consistency, and Accuracy indicators is the ST-FIS. It produced the highest values of \(CI_{M}\) and \(\beta_{M}\). This suggests that this approach is indeed complex yet well-structured and stable. Its low value of the \(MAD_{M}\) index suggests that it provides precise evaluations. Present exploration also suggests that simpler methods, like the Summative, may not be sufficient in terms of consistency and accuracy. Despite its low complexity, its \(MAD_{M}\) was the highest, indicating that its ability to capture variability in data is limited. Its low \(CI_{M}\) and \(\beta_{M}\) suggest it may not be the best choice for robust evaluations.  
Our results reveal that Rubric and ST balance simplicity and accuracy. The Rubric displayed good Consistency (\(CI_{R}=1.54\)) and a reasonably attenuated penalization for Complexity (\(\beta_{R}=0.52\)), which raises it as a suitable intermediate choice. ST, (with its higher \(CP_{ST}=0.79\) and \(\beta_{ST}=0.71\)), nears the ST-FIS in quality without being as complex. ST-FIS could be the best option if the goal is to minimize variability and maximize evaluation robustness. If a more straightforward yet effective method is required, ST or Rubric may be suitable choices. According to the present results, the Summative method could be the least recommended if precision and structural rigor are essential. ST-FIS could be the best alternative for evaluations requiring precise and structured measurement. However, if a balance between simplicity and accuracy is needed, ST and Rubric could be viable options. Our exploration also suggests that the summative scheme is better recommended for cases where simplicity is prioritized over accuracy and consistency in the sense we are dealing with here. It is also worth emphasizing that alongside their outstanding performance shown by the present study, both the ST and ST-FIS could be straightforwardly adapted for evaluation of students' acquisition of competence [24]. However, a last comment is necessary. As stated in the Discussion section, performing a pending analysis of scalability, teacher training, and cultural adaptability will be essential to strengthen the potential of the ST-FIS to be adopted as a dependable alternative to conventional grading approaches.  
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15116014/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15116014/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15116014/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15116014/s1)). We provide Supplementary Materials containing the codes utilized to produce simulation results and perform Consistency and Efficiency assessments.  
Conceptualization, C.L.-R. and H.A.E.-H.; Methodology, C.L.-R. and H.A.E.-H.; Software, C.L.-R.; Validation, H.A.E.-H. and E.V.-D.; Formal analysis, H.A.E.-H. and E.V.-D.; Investigation, H.A.E.-H.; Resources, H.A.E.-H.; Writing--original draft, C.L.-R. and H.A.E.-H.; Writing--review & editing, C.L.-R., H.A.E.-H., E.V.-D. and H.H.-A.; Supervision, H.A.E.-H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
Not applicable.  
**Data Availability Statement:** All data produced by simulations are available from the corresponding author.  
**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflicts of interest.