paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

GoodPoint: Learning Constructive Scientific Paper Feedback from Author Responses

2026-04-13 · Jimin Mun, Chani Jung, Xuhui Zhou, Hyunwoo Kim, Maarten Sap arxiv

While LLMs hold significant potential to transform scientific research, we advocate for their use to augment and empower researchers rather than to automate research without human oversight. To this end, we study constructive feedback generation, the task of producing targeted, actionable feedback that helps authors improve both their research and its presentation. In this work, we operationalize the effectiveness of feedback along two author-centric axes-validity and author action. We first curate GoodPoint-ICLR, a dataset of 19K ICLR papers with reviewer feedback annotated along both dimensions using author responses. Building on this, we introduce GoodPoint, a training recipe that leverages success signals from author responses through fine-tuning on valid and actionable feedback, together with preference optimization on both real and synthetic preference pairs. Our evaluation on a benchmark of 1.2K ICLR papers shows that a GoodPoint-trained Qwen3-8B improves the predicted success rate by 83.7% over the base model and sets a new state-of-the-art among LLMs of similar size in feedback matching on a golden human feedback set, even surpassing Gemini-3-flash in precision. We further validate these findings through an expert human study, demonstrating that GoodPoint consistently delivers higher practical value as perceived by authors.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2604.11924

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors

2025-08-31 · Abdelrahman Sadallah, Tim Baumgärtner, Iryna Gurevych, Ted Briscoe arxiv

Providing constructive feedback to paper authors is a core component of peer review. With reviewers increasingly having less time to perform reviews, automated support systems are required to ensure high reviewing qualit…

Benchmark on Peer Review Toxic Detection: A Challenging Task with a New Dataset

2025-02-01 · Man Luo, Bradley Peterson, Rafael Gan, Hari Ramalingame 외

Peer review is crucial for advancing and improving science through constructive criticism. However, toxic feedback can discourage authors and hinder scientific progress. This work explores an important but underexplored …

Sentiment Analysis

OpenReviewer: A Specialized Large Language Model for Generating Critical Scientific Paper Reviews

2024-12-16 · Maximilian Idahl, Zahra Ahmadi

We present OpenReviewer, an open-source system for generating high-quality peer reviews of machine learning and AI conference papers. At its core is Llama-OpenReviewer-8B, an 8B parameter language model specifically fine…

Language ModelingLanguage ModellingLarge Language Model

Human-AI Collaboration in Science at Scale: A Global Large-scale Randomized Field Experiment

2026-05-22 · Binglu Wang, Weixin Liang, Jiahui Xue, Yuhui Zhang 외 arxiv

Collaboration is the defining mode of modern science, yet its core mechanism -- feedback -- remains hard to observe, difficult to scale, and unequally distributed. Here we test whether large language models (LLMs) can co…

Can LLMs Identify Critical Limitations within Scientific Research? A Systematic Evaluation on AI Research Papers

2025-07-03 · Zhijian Xu, Yilun Zhao, Manasi Patwardhan, Lovekesh Vig 외 arxiv

Peer review is fundamental to scientific research, but the growing volume of publications has intensified the challenges of this expertise-intensive process. While LLMs show promise in various scientific tasks, their pot…