NovBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Academic Paper Novelty Assessment
Novelty is a core requirement in academic publishing and a central focus of peer review, yet the growing volume of submissions has placed increasing pressure on human reviewers. While large language models (LLMs), including those fine-tuned on peer review data, have shown promise in generating review comments, the absence of a dedicated benchmark has limited systematic evaluation of their ability to assess research novelty. To address this gap, we introduce NovBench, the first large-scale benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' capability to generate novelty evaluations in support of human peer review. NovBench comprises 1,684 paper-review pairs from a leading NLP conference, including novelty descriptions extracted from paper introductions and corresponding expert-written novelty evaluations. We focus on both sources because the introduction provides a standardized and explicit articulation of novelty claims, while expert-written novelty evaluations constitute one of the current gold standards of human judgment. Furthermore, we propose a four-dimensional evaluation framework (including Relevance, Correctness, Coverage, and Clarity) to assess the quality of LLM-generated novelty evaluations. Extensive experiments on both general and specialized LLMs under different prompting strategies reveal that current models exhibit limited understanding of scientific novelty, and that fine--tuned models often suffer from instruction-following deficiencies. These findings underscore the need for targeted fine-tuning strategies that jointly improve novelty comprehension and instruction adherence.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Automatic Academic Paper Rating Based on Modularized Hierarchical Convolutional Neural Network
As more and more academic papers are being submitted to conferences and journals, evaluating all these papers by professionals is time-consuming and can cause inequality due to the personal factors of the reviewers. In t…
AEGIS: A Holistic Benchmark for Evaluating Forensic Analysis of AI-Generated Academic Images
We introduce AEGIS, A holistic benchmark for Evaluating forensic analysis of AI-Generated academic ImageS. Compared to existing benchmarks, AEGIS features three key advances: (1) Domain-Specific Complexity: covering seve…
Automated Novelty Evaluation of Academic Paper: A Collaborative Approach Integrating Human and Large Language Model Knowledge
Novelty is a crucial criterion in the peer review process for evaluating academic papers. Traditionally, it's judged by experts or measure by unique reference combinations. Both methods have limitations: experts have lim…
Can MLLMs Detect Phishing? A Comprehensive Security Benchmark Suite Focusing on Dynamic Threats and Multimodal Evaluation in Academic Environments
The rapid proliferation of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) has introduced unprecedented security challenges, particularly in phishing detection within academic environments. Academic institutions and researchers…
Measuring Research Difficulty of Academic Papers: A Case Study in Natural Language Processing
With the rapid growth of the number of academic papers, systematically evaluating the difficulty of research and its relationship to academic impact offers important significance for research topic selection and resource…