Get Started
Home
Topics
Search
Library
Research questionHow can reviewer-feedback tools give actionable guidance when reviews contain multiple co-occurring guideline violations?Scientific reviews can violate several quality guidelines in the same passage, while simple flaw labels do not tell reviewers how to revise their wording. Feedback systems must also address the reviewer rather than rewrite the review for the paper’s authors.
AI
Evaluation & Benchmarks
Natural Language Processing
Research Paper
Latest papersRecent research connected to this question, newest first.Reviewing the Reviewer: LLM-Assisted Reviewer Feedback Generation for Guideline ComplianceThe source studies LLM-assisted feedback for scientific peer reviews under ACL Rolling Review guidelines, including lazy thinking and lack of specificity. It reports a controlled rewriting study and a 1,309-sentence multi-label dataset; the reported evidence is limited to those settings.research paper · Sep 2, 2026
Related questions
Can user feedback reliably guide LLM revisions if LLM judges overlook the resulting improvements?How can LLM graders assign accurate marks while grounding each judgment in rubrics and student-answer evidence?How can human reviewers reliably detect LLM errors when verification reasoning is hard to retrieve?How can AI-assisted peer review reduce unsupported criticisms without overlooking consequential weaknesses?