SLIDERS: Systematic Reviews via Automated Evidence Synthesis and Reconciliation
Systematic reviews -- which requires comprehensive evidence collection and synthesis from large document corpora in response to targeted research questions -- are foundational in finance, social sciences, and other technical fields. Manual construction of evidence tables is labor-intensive, and recent LLM-based assistants relying on embedding or keyword based search often fail to meet the coverage standards of systematic reviews. We introduce SLIDERS, a novel LLM-based methodology for systematic reviews, by automatically assembling evidence tables tailored to research questions. In addition to extracting structured data from documents, SLIDERS can extract full-text excerpts that serve as direct evidence or as provenance for structured data. Core to SLIDERS is an automated evidence reconciliation agent that writes code to analyze and reconcile extracted evidence, bringing together information fragmented across documents, resolving inconsistencies across excerpts, and synthesizing overlapping findings into a coherent evidence table. In addition, SLIDERS allows users to ask follow-up questions in natural language to further explore the assembled evidence. We evaluate SLIDERS on three systematic-review-style tasks over large document collections. SLIDERS outperforms the best-performing baseline across benchmarks, remains near 90% accuracy across 6M-11M-token corpora. On two new follow-up analysis benchmarks SLIDERS can answer 77.9% and 58.3% followup questions accurately
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Question AnsweringSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
An AI-Driven Live Systematic Reviews in the Brain-Heart Interconnectome: Minimizing Research Waste and Advancing Evidence Synthesis
The Brain-Heart Interconnectome (BHI) combines neurology and cardiology but is hindered by inefficiencies in evidence synthesis, poor adherence to quality standards, and research waste. To address these challenges, we de…
Decision MakingRAGRetrieval-augmented GenerationEnabling Inclusive Systematic Reviews: Incorporating Preprint Articles with Large Language Model-Driven Evaluations
Background. Systematic reviews in comparative effectiveness research require timely evidence synthesis. Preprints accelerate knowledge dissemination but vary in quality, posing challenges for systematic reviews. Methods.…
ArticlesLanguage ModelingLanguage ModellingLarge Language ModelCompiling Prompts, Not Crafting Them: A Reproducible Workflow for AI-Assisted Evidence Synthesis
Large language models (LLMs) offer significant potential to accelerate systematic literature reviews (SLRs), yet current approaches often rely on brittle, manually crafted prompts that compromise reliability and reproduc…
CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews
Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) play an essential role in summarising, synthesising and validating scientific evidence. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in using machine learning techniques to auto…
Question AnsweringRetrievalQuery-driven Document-level Scientific Evidence Extraction from Biomedical Studies
Extracting scientific evidence from biomedical studies for clinical research questions (e.g., Does stem cell transplantation improve quality of life in patients with medically refractory Crohn's disease compared to place…
RetrievalRetrieval-augmented Generation