# ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewing

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.00622 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00622/

## Key facts

- Cited by 122 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 53 of its 92 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 53)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01108/) (2019)
- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16291/) (2023)
- [Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03629/) (2022)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.12173/) (2023)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [LLM-Planner: Few-Shot Grounded Planning for Embodied Agents with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.04088/) (2022)
- [SPECTER: Document-level Representation Learning using Citation-informed Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.07180/) (2020)
- [Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.00050/) (2023)
- [How Language Model Hallucinations Can Snowball](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13534/) (2023)
- [Social Simulacra: Creating Populated Prototypes for Social Computing Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.04024/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08399/) (2023)
- [Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03514/) (2023)
- [WANLI: Worker and AI Collaboration for Natural Language Inference Dataset Creation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.05955/) (2022)
- [Want To Reduce Labeling Cost? GPT-3 Can Help](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.13487/) (2021)
- [Generating Datasets with Pretrained Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.07540/) (2021)
- [Impact of Pretraining Term Frequencies on Few-Shot Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.07206/) (2022)
- [A Dataset of Peer Reviews (PeerRead): Collection, Insights and NLP Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.09635/) (2018)
- [Large Language Models are Few-Shot Health Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15525/) (2023)
- [Prompt as Triggers for Backdoor Attack: Examining the Vulnerability in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01219/) (2023)
- [When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01478/) (2022)
- [Training Trajectories of Language Models Across Scales](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09803/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 122)

- [Challenges and Applications of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10169/) (2023)
- [Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01783/) (2023)
- [Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07183/) (2024)
- [CycleResearcher: Improving Automated Research via Automated Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.00816/) (2024)
- [Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.01268/) (2024)
- [MARG: Multi-Agent Review Generation for Scientific Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.04259/) (2024)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Scientific Large Language Models and Their Applications in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10833/) (2024)
- [From Automation to Autonomy: A Survey on Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13259/) (2025)
- [OpenReviewer: A Specialized Large Language Model for Generating Critical Scientific Paper Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.11948/) (2024)
- [MLR-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on Open-Ended Machine Learning Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19955/) (2025)
- [LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.16253/) (2024)
- [Large language models for automated scholarly paper review: A survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.10326/) (2025)
- [Towards Robust Agentic CUDA Kernel Benchmarking, Verification, and Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.14279/) (2025)
- [Are We There Yet? Revealing the Risks of Utilizing Large Language Models in Scholarly Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01708/) (2024)
- [Can LLM feedback enhance review quality? A randomized study of 20K reviews at ICLR 2025](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.09737/) (2025)
- [Peer Review as A Multi-Turn and Long-Context Dialogue with Role-Based Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05688/) (2024)
- [AI-Driven Review Systems: Evaluating LLMs in Scalable and Bias-Aware Academic Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.10365/) (2024)
- [Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.05151/) (2025)
- [GPT4 is Slightly Helpful for Peer-Review Assistance: A Pilot Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05492/) (2023)
- [Reproducibility in Machine Learning-based Research: Overview, Barriers and Drivers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14325/) (2024)
- [Position: The AI Conference Peer Review Crisis Demands Author Feedback and Reviewer Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.04966/) (2025)
- [Automated Peer Reviewing in Paper SEA: Standardization, Evaluation, and Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12857/) (2024)
- [ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08506/) (2025)
- [The More You Automate, the Less You See: Hidden Pitfalls of AI Scientist Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.08713/) (2025)
- [Accumulating Context Changes the Beliefs of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.01805/) (2025)
- [How do Large Language Models Navigate Conflicts between Honesty and Helpfulness?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.07282/) (2024)
- [What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.06563/) (2024)
- [ReviewEval: An Evaluation Framework for AI-Generated Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11736/) (2025)
- [Is Your Paper Being Reviewed by an LLM? Benchmarking AI Text Detection in Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19614/) (2025)
- [Detecting LLM-Generated Peer Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.15772/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Given the rapid ascent of large language models (LLMs), we study the question: (How) can large language models help in reviewing of scientific papers or proposals? We first conduct some pilot studies where we find that (i) GPT-4 outperforms other LLMs (Bard, Vicuna, Koala, Alpaca, LLaMa, Dolly, OpenAssistant, StableLM), and (ii) prompting with a specific question (e.g., to identify errors) outperforms prompting to simply write a review. With these insights, we study the use of LLMs (specifically, GPT-4) for three tasks: 1. Identifying errors: We construct 13 short computer science papers each with a deliberately inserted error, and ask the LLM to check for the correctness of these papers. We observe that the LLM finds errors in 7 of them, spanning both mathematical and conceptual errors. 2. Verifying checklists: We task the LLM to verify 16 closed-ended checklist questions in the respective sections of 15 NeurIPS 2022 papers. We find that across 119 {checklist question, paper} pairs, the LLM had an 86.6% accuracy. 3. Choosing the "better" paper: We generate 10 pairs of abstracts, deliberately designing each pair in such a way that one abstract was clearly superior than the other. The LLM, however, struggled to discern these relatively straightforward distinctions accurately, committing errors in its evaluations for 6 out of the 10 pairs. Based on these experiments, we think that LLMs have a promising use as reviewing assistants for specific reviewing tasks, but not (yet) for complete evaluations of papers or proposals.