arXiv · 2503.08506
ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviews
Abstract
Academic paper review is a critical yet time-consuming task within the research community. With the increasing volume of academic publications, automating the review process has become a significant challenge. The primary issue lies in generating comprehensive, accurate, and reasoning-consistent review comments that align with human reviewers' judgments. In this paper, we address this challenge by proposing ReviewAgents, a framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to generate academic paper reviews. We first introduce a novel dataset, Review-CoT, consisting of 142k review comments, designed for training LLM agents. This dataset emulates the structured reasoning process of human reviewers-summarizing the paper, referencing relevant works, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and generating a review conclusion. Building upon this, we train LLM reviewer agents capable of structured reasoning using a relevant-paper-aware training method. Furthermore, we construct ReviewAgents, a multi-role, multi-LLM agent review framework, to enhance the review comment generation process. Additionally, we propose ReviewBench, a benchmark for evaluating the review comments generated by LLMs. Our experimental results on ReviewBench demonstrate that while existing LLMs exhibit a certain degree of potential for automating the review process, there remains a gap when compared to human-generated reviews. Moreover, our ReviewAgents framework further narrows this gap, outperforming advanced LLMs in generating review comments.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Xian Gao, Jiacheng Ruan, Zongyun Zhang, Jingsheng Gao, Ting Liu, Yuzhuo Fu. 2025-03-11. ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviews. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.08506
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.