REVIEW 3 cited by
Automated Literature Review Using NLP Techniques and LLM-Based Retrieval-Augmented Generation
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
This research presents and compares multiple approaches to automate the generation of literature reviews using several Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with a Large Language Model (LLM). The ever-increasing number of research articles provides a huge challenge for manual literature review. It has resulted in an increased demand for automation. Developing a system capable of automatically generating the literature reviews from only the PDF files as input is the primary objective of this research work. The effectiveness of several Natural Language Processing (NLP) strategies, such as the frequency-based method (spaCy), the transformer model (Simple T5), and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with Large Language Model (GPT-3.5-turbo), is evaluated to meet the primary objective. The SciTLDR dataset is chosen for this research experiment and three distinct techniques are utilized to implement three different systems for auto-generating the literature reviews. The ROUGE scores are used for the evaluation of all three systems. Based on the evaluation, the Large Language Model GPT-3.5-turbo achieved the highest ROUGE-1 score, 0.364. The transformer model comes in second place and spaCy is at the last position. Finally, a graphical user interface is created for the best system based on the large language model.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Whose Name Comes Up? II: Benchmarking and Intervention-Based Auditing of LLM-Based Scholar Recommendation
A new benchmark auditing LLM-based scholar recommendation across 22 models shows that inference-time interventions (temperature, constrained prompting, RAG) trade off technical quality against social representation ra...
-
Who Gets Recommended? Investigating Gender, Race, and Country Disparities in Paper Recommendations from Large Language Models
LLM recommendations of important AI research favor recent, well-cited, team-authored papers, but do not measurably over-represent male, white, or developed-country scholars relative to a human-curated benchmark.
-
How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?
This survey proposes a four-level capability framework for AI Scientist systems and, using an AI reviewer, finds that current systems produce papers rated well below normal scientific standards.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.