ReviewGrounder: Improving Review Substantiveness with Rubric-Guided, Tool-Integrated Agents
The rapid rise in AI conference submissions has driven increasing exploration of large language models (LLMs) for peer review support. However, LLM-based reviewers often generate superficial, formulaic comments lacking substantive, evidence-grounded feedback. We attribute this to the underutilization of two key components of human reviewing: explicit rubrics and contextual grounding in existing work. To address this, we introduce REVIEWBENCH, a benchmark evaluating review text according to paper-specific rubrics derived from official guidelines, the paper's content, and human-written reviews. We further propose REVIEWGROUNDER, a rubric-guided, tool-integrated multi-agent framework that decomposes reviewing into drafting and grounding stages, enriching shallow drafts via targeted evidence consolidation. Experiments on REVIEWBENCH show that REVIEWGROUNDER, using a Phi-4-14B-based drafter and a GPT-OSS-120B-based grounding stage, consistently outperforms baselines with substantially stronger/larger backbones (e.g., GPT-4.1 and DeepSeek-R1-670B) in both alignment with human judgments and rubric-based review quality across 8 dimensions. The code is available \href{https://github.com/EigenTom/ReviewGrounder}{here}.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
RubricEM: Meta-RL with Rubric-guided Policy Decomposition beyond Verifiable Rewards
Training deep research agents, namely systems that plan, search, evaluate evidence, and synthesize long-form reports, pushes reinforcement learning beyond the regime of verifiable rewards. Their outputs lack ground-truth…
Reinforcement LearningARISE: Agentic Rubric-Guided Iterative Survey Engine for Automated Scholarly Paper Generation
The rapid expansion of scholarly literature presents significant challenges in synthesizing comprehensive, high-quality academic surveys. Recent advancements in agentic systems offer considerable promise for automating t…
Paper generationPeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Quality
The increasing scale and variability of peer review in scholarly venues has created an urgent need for systematic, interpretable, and extensible tools to assess review quality. We present PeeriScope, a modular platform t…
Datasheets Aren't Enough: DataRubrics for Automated Quality Metrics and Accountability
High-quality datasets are fundamental to training and evaluating machine learning models, yet their creation-especially with accurate human annotations-remains a significant challenge. Many dataset paper submissions lack…
DescriptiveSynthetic Data GenerationActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation
As LLMs are increasingly used for pre-submission self-review, there is growing demand for feedback that not only identifies weaknesses but also guides authors toward concrete revisions. We study this as Actionable Peer-r…