Generating a review for an academic research paper is a complex task that requires a deep understanding of the document's content and the interdependencies between its sections. It demands not only insight into technical details but also an appreciation of the paper's overall coherence and structure. Recent methods have predominantly focused on fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) to address this challenge. However, they often overlook the computational and performance limitations imposed by long input token lengths. To address this, we introduce AutoRev, an Automatic Peer Review System for Academic Research Papers. Our novel framework represents an academic document as a graph, enabling the extraction of the most critical passages that contribute significantly to the review. This graph-based approach demonstrates effectiveness for review generation and is potentially adaptable to various downstream tasks, such as question answering, summarization, and document representation. When applied to review generation, our method outperforms SOTA baselines by an average of 58.72% across all evaluation metrics. We hope that our work will stimulate further research in applying graph-based extraction techniques to other downstream tasks in NLP. We plan to make our code public upon acceptance.
Recommender systems (RS) are increasingly vulnerable to shilling attacks, where adversaries inject fake user profiles to manipulate system outputs. Traditional attack strategies often rely on simplistic heuristics, require access to internal RS data, and overlook the manipulation potential of textual reviews. In this work, we introduce Agent4SR, a novel framework that leverages Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents to perform low-knowledge, high-impact shilling attacks through both rating and review generation. Agent4SR simulates realistic user behavior by orchestrating adversarial interactions, selecting items, assigning ratings, and crafting reviews, while maintaining behavioral plausibility. Our design includes targeted profile construction, hybrid memory retrieval, and a review attack strategy that propagates target item features across unrelated reviews to amplify manipulation. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets and RS architectures demonstrate that Agent4SR outperforms existing low-knowledge baselines in both effectiveness and stealth. Our findings reveal a new class of emergent threats posed by LLM-driven agents, underscoring the urgent need for enhanced defenses in modern recommender systems.
Large language models (LLMs) have grown in their usage to provide support for question answering across numerous disciplines. The models on their own have already shown promise for answering basic questions, however fail quickly where expert domain knowledge is required or the question is nuanced. Scientific research often involves searching for relevant literature, distilling pertinent information from that literature and analysing how the findings support or contradict one another. The information is often encapsulated in the full text body of research articles, rather than just in the abstracts. Statements within these articles frequently require the wider article context to be fully understood. We have built an LLM-based system that performs such search and distillation of information encapsulated in scientific literature, and we evaluate our keyword based search and information distillation system against a set of biology related questions from previously released literature benchmarks. We demonstrate sparse retrieval methods exhibit results close to state of the art without the need for dense retrieval, with its associated infrastructure and complexity overhead. We also show how to increase the coverage of relevant documents for literature review generation.
The rapid growth of scholarly submissions has overwhelmed traditional peer review systems, driving the need for intelligent automation to preserve scientific rigor. While large language models (LLMs) show promise in automating manuscript critiques, their ability to synthesize high-stakes meta-reviews, which require conflict-aware reasoning and consensus derivation, remains underdeveloped. Existing methods fail to effectively handle conflicting viewpoints within differing opinions, and often introduce additional cognitive biases, such as anchoring effects and conformity bias.To overcome these limitations, we propose the Cognitive Alignment Framework (CAF), a dual-process architecture that transforms LLMs into adaptive scientific arbitrators. By operationalizing Kahneman's dual-process theory, CAF introduces a three-step cognitive pipeline: review initialization, incremental integration, and cognitive alignment.Empirical validation shows that CAF outperforms existing LLM-based methods, with sentiment consistency gains reaching up to 19.47\% and content consistency improving by as much as 12.95\%.
This paper presents an AI-generated review of Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models, summarizing key methodologies, findings, and future directions. The content is produced using large language models (LLMs) and is intended only for demonstration purposes. This work does not represent original research, but highlights how AI can help automate literature reviews. As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent, ensuring accuracy, reliability, and proper synthesis remains a challenge. Future research will focus on developing a structured framework for AI-assisted literature reviews, exploring techniques to enhance citation accuracy, source credibility, and contextual understanding. By examining the potential and limitations of LLM in academic writing, this study aims to contribute to the broader discussion of integrating AI into research workflows. This work serves as a preliminary step toward establishing systematic approaches for leveraging AI in literature review generation, making academic knowledge synthesis more efficient and scalable.
Code review is a crucial but often complex, subjective, and time-consuming activity in software development. Over the past decades, significant efforts have been made to automate this process. Early approaches focused on knowledge-based systems (KBS) that apply rule-based mechanisms to detect code issues, providing precise feedback but struggling with complex, context-dependent cases. More recent work has shifted toward fine-tuning pre-trained language models for code review, enabling broader issue coverage but often at the expense of precision. In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach that combines the strengths of KBS and learning-based systems (LBS) to generate high-quality, comprehensive code reviews. Our method integrates knowledge at three distinct stages of the language model pipeline: during data preparation (Data-Augmented Training, DAT), at inference (Retrieval-Augmented Generation, RAG), and after inference (Naive Concatenation of Outputs, NCO). We empirically evaluate our combination strategies against standalone KBS and LBS fine-tuned on a real-world dataset. Our results show that these hybrid strategies enhance the relevance, completeness, and overall quality of review comments, effectively bridging the gap between rule-based tools and deep learning models.
In this paper, we introduce ChatCite, a novel method leveraging large language models (LLMs) for generating comparative literature summaries. The ability to summarize research papers with a focus on key comparisons between studies is an essential task in academic research. Existing summarization models, while effective at generating concise summaries, fail to provide deep comparative insights. ChatCite addresses this limitation by incorporating a multi-step reasoning mechanism that extracts critical elements from papers, incrementally builds a comparative summary, and refines the output through a reflective memory process. We evaluate ChatCite on a custom dataset, CompLit-LongContext, consisting of 1000 research papers with annotated comparative summaries. Experimental results show that ChatCite outperforms several baseline methods, including GPT-4, BART, T5, and CoT, across various automatic evaluation metrics such as ROUGE and the newly proposed G-Score. Human evaluation further confirms that ChatCite generates more coherent, insightful, and fluent summaries compared to these baseline models. Our method provides a significant advancement in automatic literature review generation, offering researchers a powerful tool for efficiently comparing and synthesizing scientific research.
Literature reviews play a crucial role in scientific research for understanding the current state of research, identifying gaps, and guiding future studies on specific topics. However, the process of conducting a comprehensive literature review is yet time-consuming. This paper proposes a novel framework, collaborative knowledge minigraph agents (CKMAs), to automate scholarly literature reviews. A novel prompt-based algorithm, the knowledge minigraph construction agent (KMCA), is designed to identify relations between concepts from academic literature and automatically constructs knowledge minigraphs. By leveraging the capabilities of large language models on constructed knowledge minigraphs, the multiple path summarization agent (MPSA) efficiently organizes concepts and relations from different viewpoints to generate literature review paragraphs. We evaluate CKMAs on three benchmark datasets. Experimental results show the effectiveness of the proposed method, further revealing promising applications of LLMs in scientific research.
In this work, we present HiReview, a novel framework for hierarchical taxonomy-driven automatic literature review generation. With the exponential growth of academic documents, manual literature reviews have become increasingly labor-intensive and time-consuming, while traditional summarization models struggle to generate comprehensive document reviews effectively. Large language models (LLMs), with their powerful text processing capabilities, offer a potential solution; however, research on incorporating LLMs for automatic document generation remains limited. To address key challenges in large-scale automatic literature review generation (LRG), we propose a two-stage taxonomy-then-generation approach that combines graph-based hierarchical clustering with retrieval-augmented LLMs. First, we retrieve the most relevant sub-community within the citation network, then generate a hierarchical taxonomy tree by clustering papers based on both textual content and citation relationships. In the second stage, an LLM generates coherent and contextually accurate summaries for clusters or topics at each hierarchical level, ensuring comprehensive coverage and logical organization of the literature. Extensive experiments demonstrate that HiReview significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods, achieving superior hierarchical organization, content relevance, and factual accuracy in automatic literature review generation tasks.
Peer review is the quality assessment of a manuscript by one or more peer experts. Papers are submitted by the authors to scientific venues, and these papers must be reviewed by peers or other authors. The meta-reviewers then gather the peer reviews, assess them, and create a meta-review and decision for each manuscript. As the number of papers submitted to these venues has grown in recent years, it becomes increasingly challenging for meta-reviewers to collect these peer evaluations on time while still maintaining the quality that is the primary goal of meta-review creation. In this paper, we address two peer review aggregation challenges a meta-reviewer faces: paper acceptance decision-making and meta-review generation. Firstly, we propose to automate the process of acceptance decision prediction by applying traditional machine learning algorithms. We use pre-trained word embedding techniques BERT to process the reviews written in natural language text. For the meta-review generation, we propose a transfer learning model based on the T5 model. Experimental results show that BERT is more effective than the other word embedding techniques, and the recommendation score is an important feature for the acceptance decision prediction. In addition, we figure out that fine-tuned T5 outperforms other inference models. Our proposed system takes peer reviews and other relevant features as input to produce a meta-review and make a judgment on whether or not the paper should be accepted. In addition, experimental results show that the acceptance decision prediction system of our task outperforms the existing models, and the meta-review generation task shows significantly improved scores compared to the existing models. For the statistical test, we utilize the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to assess whether there is a statistically significant improvement between paired observations.
Explainable Recommendation task is designed to receive a pair of user and item and output explanations to justify why an item is recommended to a user. Many models treat review-generation as a proxy of explainable recommendation. Although they are able to generate fluent and grammatical sentences, they suffer from generality and hallucination issues. We propose a personalized, aspect-controlled model called Multi-Aspect Prompt LEarner (MAPLE), in which it integrates aspect category as another input dimension to facilitate the memorization of fine-grained aspect terms. Experiments on two real-world review datasets in restaurant domain show that MAPLE outperforms the baseline review-generation models in terms of text and feature diversity while maintaining excellent coherence and factual relevance. We further treat MAPLE as a retriever component in the retriever-reader framework and employ a Large-Language Model (LLM) as the reader, showing that MAPLE's explanation along with the LLM's comprehension ability leads to enriched and personalized explanation as a result. We will release the code and data in this http upon acceptance.
Literature research, vital for scientific work, faces the challenge of surging information volumes exceeding researchers' processing capabilities. We present an automated review generation method based on large language models (LLMs) to overcome efficiency bottlenecks and reduce cognitive load. Our statistically validated evaluation framework demonstrates that the generated reviews match or exceed manual quality, offering broad applicability across research fields without requiring users' domain knowledge. Applied to propane dehydrogenation (PDH) catalysts, our method swiftly analyzed 343 articles, averaging seconds per article per LLM account, producing comprehensive reviews spanning 35 topics, with extended analysis of 1041 articles providing insights into catalysts' properties. Through multi-layered quality control, we effectively mitigated LLMs' hallucinations, with expert verification confirming accuracy and citation integrity while demonstrating hallucination risks reduced to below 0.5\% with 95\% confidence. Released Windows application enables one-click review generation, enhancing research productivity and literature recommendation efficiency while setting the stage for broader scientific explorations.
Product review generation is an important task in recommender systems, which could provide explanation and persuasiveness for the recommendation. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs, e.g., ChatGPT) have shown superior text modeling and generating ability, which could be applied in review generation. However, directly applying the LLMs for generating reviews might be troubled by the ``polite'' phenomenon of the LLMs and could not generate personalized reviews (e.g., negative reviews). In this paper, we propose Review-LLM that customizes LLMs for personalized review generation. Firstly, we construct the prompt input by aggregating user historical behaviors, which include corresponding item titles and reviews. This enables the LLMs to capture user interest features and review writing style. Secondly, we incorporate ratings as indicators of satisfaction into the prompt, which could further improve the model's understanding of user preferences and the sentiment tendency control of generated reviews. Finally, we feed the prompt text into LLMs, and use Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) to make the model generate personalized reviews for the given user and target item. Experimental results on the real-world dataset show that our fine-tuned model could achieve better review generation performance than existing close-source LLMs.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated wide-ranging applications across various fields and have shown significant potential in the academic peer-review process. However, existing applications are primarily limited to static review generation based on submitted papers, which fail to capture the dynamic and iterative nature of real-world peer reviews. In this paper, we reformulate the peer-review process as a multi-turn, long-context dialogue, incorporating distinct roles for authors, reviewers, and decision makers. We construct a comprehensive dataset containing over 26,841 papers with 92,017 reviews collected from multiple sources, including the top-tier conference and prestigious journal. This dataset is meticulously designed to facilitate the applications of LLMs for multi-turn dialogues, effectively simulating the complete peer-review process. Furthermore, we propose a series of metrics to evaluate the performance of LLMs for each role under this reformulated peer-review setting, ensuring fair and comprehensive evaluations. We believe this work provides a promising perspective on enhancing the LLM-driven peer-review process by incorporating dynamic, role-based interactions. It aligns closely with the iterative and interactive nature of real-world academic peer review, offering a robust foundation for future research and development in this area. We open-source the dataset at https://github.com/chengtan9907/ReviewMT.
Modern natural language generation systems with Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit the capability to generate a plausible summary of multiple documents; however, it is uncertain if they truly possess the capability of information consolidation to generate summaries, especially on documents with opinionated information. We focus on meta-review generation, a form of sentiment summarisation for the scientific domain. To make scientific sentiment summarization more grounded, we hypothesize that human meta-reviewers follow a three-layer framework of sentiment consolidation to write meta-reviews. Based on the framework, we propose novel prompting methods for LLMs to generate meta-reviews and evaluation metrics to assess the quality of generated meta-reviews. Our framework is validated empirically as we find that prompting LLMs based on the framework -- compared with prompting them with simple instructions -- generates better meta-reviews.
Recent developments in LLMs offer new opportunities for assisting authors in improving their work. In this paper, we envision a use case where authors can receive LLM-generated reviews that uncover weak points in the current draft. While initial methods for automated review generation already exist, these methods tend to produce reviews that lack detail, and they do not cover the range of opinions that human reviewers produce. To address this shortcoming, we propose an efficient two-stage review generation framework called Reviewer2. Unlike prior work, this approach explicitly models the distribution of possible aspects that the review may address. We show that this leads to more detailed reviews that better cover the range of aspects that human reviewers identify in the draft. As part of the research, we generate a large-scale review dataset of 27k papers and 99k reviews that we annotate with aspect prompts, which we make available as a resource for future research.
In this work, we investigate the controllability of large language models (LLMs) on scientific summarization tasks. We identify key stylistic and content coverage factors that characterize different types of summaries such as paper reviews, abstracts, and lay summaries. By controlling stylistic features, we find that non-fine-tuned LLMs outperform humans in the MuP review generation task, both in terms of similarity to reference summaries and human preferences. Also, we show that we can improve the controllability of LLMs with keyword-based classifier-free guidance (CFG) while achieving lexical overlap comparable to strong fine-tuned baselines on arXiv and PubMed. However, our results also indicate that LLMs cannot consistently generate long summaries with more than 8 sentences. Furthermore, these models exhibit limited capacity to produce highly abstractive lay summaries. Although LLMs demonstrate strong generic summarization competency, sophisticated content control without costly fine-tuning remains an open problem for domain-specific applications.
We study the ability of LLMs to generate feedback for scientific papers and develop MARG, a feedback generation approach using multiple LLM instances that engage in internal discussion. By distributing paper text across agents, MARG can consume the full text of papers beyond the input length limitations of the base LLM, and by specializing agents and incorporating sub-tasks tailored to different comment types (experiments, clarity, impact) it improves the helpfulness and specificity of feedback. In a user study, baseline methods using GPT-4 were rated as producing generic or very generic comments more than half the time, and only 1.7 comments per paper were rated as good overall in the best baseline. Our system substantially improves the ability of GPT-4 to generate specific and helpful feedback, reducing the rate of generic comments from 60% to 29% and generating 3.7 good comments per paper (a 2.2x improvement).
Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Model (DDPM) has shown great competence in image and audio generation tasks. However, there exist few attempts to employ DDPM in the text generation, especially review generation under recommendation systems. Fueled by the predicted reviews explainability that justifies recommendations could assist users better understand the recommended items and increase the transparency of recommendation system, we propose a Diffusion Model-based Review Generation towards EXplainable Recommendation named Diffusion-EXR. Diffusion-EXR corrupts the sequence of review embeddings by incrementally introducing varied levels of Gaussian noise to the sequence of word embeddings and learns to reconstruct the original word representations in the reverse process. The nature of DDPM enables our lightweight Transformer backbone to perform excellently in the recommendation review generation task. Extensive experimental results have demonstrated that Diffusion-EXR can achieve state-of-the-art review generation for recommendation on two publicly available benchmark datasets.
Positioned between pre-training and user deployment, aligning large language models (LLMs) through reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a prevailing strategy for training instruction following-models such as ChatGPT. In this work, we initiate the study of privacy-preserving alignment of LLMs through Differential Privacy (DP) in conjunction with RL. Following the influential work of Ziegler et al. (2020), we study two dominant paradigms: (i) alignment via RL without human in the loop (e.g., positive review generation) and (ii) alignment via RL from human feedback (RLHF) (e.g., summarization in a human-preferred way). We give a new DP framework to achieve alignment via RL, and prove its correctness. Our experimental results validate the effectiveness of our approach, offering competitive utility while ensuring strong privacy protections.