deep-learningarxiv

Major Revision, Minor Accountability: LLMs as Reviewers of Published Articles in Top-Tier Journals

With the growth of scientific output, the peer review system is approaching a breaking point: reviewers are increasingly hard to secure, and turnaround times lengthen accordingly. LLM-assisted or…

Bastien Le Guellec / Su Hwan Kim / Raphael Bentegeac / Aghiles Hamroun

用途
原典で確認
難易度の目安
Hard
実装コストの目安
High

概要

With the growth of scientific output, the peer review system is approaching a breaking point: reviewers are increasingly hard to secure, and turnaround times lengthen accordingly. LLM-assisted or LLM-generated peer review has been proposed as a remedy, but how such models would treat manuscripts already published in top-tier journals, the closest thing the current system has to a gold standard of scientific validity, is not known. Here we assembled a corpus of 200 articles, each released under a CC BY 4.0 license and published in 2026, from 20 general-science, life-science, and clinical-medicine journals including Nature, Science, and Cell, and asked four current LLMs (two proprietary, two open-weight) to produce independent peer-review reports of each one under a blinded protocol. Their decisions were overwhelmingly harsh and starkly inconsistent with each other: 605 of 800 reviews (75.6%) recommended major revision or rejection, but the rate at which any single model did so ranged from 17.5% to 100% (p < 0.001), disagreement on manuscripts that had, by construction, already survived real editorial review at the journals in question. When the same manuscripts were doctored with one deliberately planted, field-specific methodological or statistical flaw, detection rates varied from 17.0% to 60.5% across models (p < 0.001). Recommending revision for papers that had already passed editorial review (low specificity) while missing flaws deliberately placed in front of them (low sensitivity), these models produce output that should be read for what it is: an uneven, framing- and model-dependent signal.

参考リンク

リンク先のライセンス・再現性・データ条件をご確認ください。自動分類や実装の目安は保証ではありません。

実装を始めるプロンプト

参考リンクを確認したうえで、次の内容をコピーして利用できます。

# 論文・記事
Major Revision, Minor Accountability: LLMs as Reviewers of Published Articles in Top-Tier Journals

# 概要
With the growth of scientific output, the peer review system is approaching a breaking point: reviewers are increasingly hard to secure, and turnaround times lengthen accordingly. LLM-assisted or…

# 原典
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.31414

上記の手法を実装してください。実行前に依存関係とライセンスを確認してください。

関連する記事

github実装リンクあり

presidio — An open-source framework for detecting, redacting, masking, and anonymizing sensitive data (PII) across text, images, and structured data. Supports NLP, pattern matching, and customizable pipelines.

presidioは、テキスト、画像、構造化データを含む敏感データを検出、削除、マスク、アノニマイズするオープンソースフレームワークです。自然言語処理、パターンマッチング、カスタマイズ可能なパイプラインをサポートします。

データのプライバシーを保護する