REVIEW 3 cited by
Evaluating and Enhancing Large Language Models for Novelty Assessment in Scholarly Publications
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recent studies have evaluated the creativity/novelty of large language models (LLMs) primarily from a semantic perspective, using benchmarks from cognitive science. However, accessing the novelty in scholarly publications is a largely unexplored area in evaluating LLMs. In this paper, we introduce a scholarly novelty benchmark (SchNovel) to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess novelty in scholarly papers. SchNovel consists of 15000 pairs of papers across six fields sampled from the arXiv dataset with publication dates spanning 2 to 10 years apart. In each pair, the more recently published paper is assumed to be more novel. Additionally, we propose RAG-Novelty, which simulates the review process taken by human reviewers by leveraging the retrieval of similar papers to assess novelty. Extensive experiments provide insights into the capabilities of different LLMs to assess novelty and demonstrate that RAG-Novelty outperforms recent baseline models.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Mapping the Evolution of Research Contributions using KnoVo
A framework that uses LLMs to extract comparison dimensions from a paper's abstract and score its novelty against related work through pairwise comparisons and temporal tracking.
-
Towards a Large Physics Benchmark
The paper outlines a multi-format, expert-scored living benchmark for evaluating physics understanding and creativity in LLMs, supported so far only by a small pilot.
-
The Budget AI Researcher and the Power of RAG Chains
A RAG-based system that pairs distant topics from nine AI conference corpora generates research abstracts rated as more novel and interesting than standard LLM prompting, but the evaluation is underpowered.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.