LLMs overrate weak papers, diverge from humans on criteria like clarity and reproducibility, write longer less diverse reviews, and remain vulnerable to prompt injection attacks that can boost low-scoring papers to acceptance levels.
Title resolution pending
4 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
years
2026 4roles
dataset 1polarities
use dataset 1representative citing papers
A survey synthesizing LLM methods for peer review critique generation and score prediction, including taxonomies, benchmark limitations, domain biases, and robustness risks such as prompt injection.
AI can generate research artifacts faster than it can verify them, so across all eight lifecycle stages the credible deployment mode is human-governed collaboration rather than full autonomy.
PeeriScope is an open modular framework that integrates structured features, LLM rubric assessments, and supervised prediction to evaluate peer review quality for self-assessment, editorial triage, and large-scale auditing.
citing papers explorer
-
LLM-as-a-Reviewer: Benchmarking Their Ability, Divergence, and Prompt Injection Resistance as Paper Reviewers
LLMs overrate weak papers, diverge from humans on criteria like clarity and reproducibility, write longer less diverse reviews, and remain vulnerable to prompt injection attacks that can boost low-scoring papers to acceptance levels.
-
LLM-Based Scientific Peer Review: Methods, Benchmarks, and Reliability Challenges
A survey synthesizing LLM methods for peer review critique generation and score prediction, including taxonomies, benchmark limitations, domain biases, and robustness risks such as prompt injection.
-
AI for Auto-Research: Roadmap & User Guide
AI can generate research artifacts faster than it can verify them, so across all eight lifecycle stages the credible deployment mode is human-governed collaboration rather than full autonomy.
-
PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Quality
PeeriScope is an open modular framework that integrates structured features, LLM rubric assessments, and supervised prediction to evaluate peer review quality for self-assessment, editorial triage, and large-scale auditing.