mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Streamlining the review process: AI-generated annotations in research manuscripts

arXiv 2412.00281 ↗First posted 29 Nov 2024cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The increasing volume of research paper submissions poses a significant challenge to the traditional academic peer-review system, leading to an overwhelming workload for reviewers. This study explores the potential of integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into the peer-review process to enhance efficiency without compromising effectiveness. We focus on manuscript annotations, particularly excerpt highlights, as a potential area for AI-human collaboration. While LLMs excel in certain tasks like aspect coverage and informativeness, they often lack high-level analysis and critical thinking, making them unsuitable for replacing human reviewers entirely. Our approach involves using LLMs to assist with specific aspects of the review process. This paper introduces AnnotateGPT, a platform that utilizes GPT-4 for manuscript review, aiming to improve reviewers' comprehension and focus. We evaluate AnnotateGPT using a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) questionnaire with nine participants and generalize the findings. Our work highlights annotation as a viable middle ground for AI-human collaboration in academic review, offering insights into integrating LLMs into the review process and tuning traditional annotation tools for LLM incorporation.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Nov 2024.

Builds on

4 of 21 references.

References · 4

  1. 2023Can Large Language Models Explain Themselves? A Study of LLM-Generated Self-Explanationscited by 90
  2. 2021Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing?cited by 63
  3. 2020ReviewRobot: Explainable Paper Review Generation based on Knowledge Synthesiscited by 53
  4. 2021Automated scholarly paper review: Concepts, technologies, and challengescited by 21

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.

2 papers.