mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

LazyReview A Dataset for Uncovering Lazy Thinking in NLP Peer Reviews

arXiv 2504.11042 ↗First posted 15 Apr 2025cs.CLcited by 13

On the map: LLM reasoning → Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Peer review is a cornerstone of quality control in scientific publishing. With the increasing workload, the unintended use of `quick' heuristics, referred to as lazy thinking, has emerged as a recurring issue compromising review quality. Automated methods to detect such heuristics can help improve the peer-reviewing process. However, there is limited NLP research on this issue, and no real-world dataset exists to support the development of detection tools. This work introduces LazyReview, a dataset of peer-review sentences annotated with fine-grained lazy thinking categories. Our analysis reveals that Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to detect these instances in a zero-shot setting. However, instruction-based fine-tuning on our dataset significantly boosts performance by 10-20 performance points, highlighting the importance of high-quality training data. Furthermore, a controlled experiment demonstrates that reviews revised with lazy thinking feedback are more comprehensive and actionable than those written without such feedback. We will release our dataset and the enhanced guidelines that can be used to train junior reviewers in the community. (Code available here: https://github.com/UKPLab/acl2025-lazy-review)

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 32 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Apr 2025.

Builds on

32 of 56 references.

References · 32

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  3. 2019SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Textcited by 1,414
  4. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  5. 2023Large Language Modelscited by 780
  6. 2021Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategiescited by 743
  7. 2024Yi: Open Foundation Models by 01.AIcited by 719
  8. 2023How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resourcescited by 408
  9. 2023Camels in a Changing Climate: Enhancing LM Adaptation with Tulu 2cited by 229
  10. 2022Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learningcited by 163
  11. 2023Are Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models just In-Context Learning?cited by 109
  12. 2023Exploring the Benefits of Training Expert Language Models over Instruction Tuningcited by 80
20 more
  1. 2024LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewingcited by 62
  2. 2022NLPeer: A Unified Resource for the Computational Study of Peer Reviewcited by 60
  3. 2023OpenICL: An Open-Source Framework for In-context Learningcited by 51
  4. 2021Logic-Driven Context Extension and Data Augmentation for Logical Reasoning of Textcited by 46
  5. 2021From LSAT: The Progress and Challenges of Complex Reasoningcited by 43
  6. 2024SciRIFF: A Resource to Enhance Language Model Instruction-Following over Scientific Literaturecited by 41
  7. 2021DISAPERE: A Dataset for Discourse Structure in Peer Review Discussionscited by 36
  8. 2020What Can We Do to Improve Peer Review in NLP?cited by 32
  9. 2024Can LLMs Reason with Rules? Logic Scaffolding for Stress-Testing and Improving LLMscited by 28
  10. 2024Evaluating the Elementary Multilingual Capabilities of Large Language Models with MultiQcited by 27
  11. 2024What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?cited by 25
  12. 2023Automatic Analysis of Substantiation in Scientific Peer Reviewscited by 19
  13. 2023Exploring Jiu-Jitsu Argumentation for Writing Peer Review Rebuttalscited by 18
  14. 2023Specialist or Generalist? Instruction Tuning for Specific NLP Taskscited by 17
  15. 2022NELLIE: A Neuro-Symbolic Inference Engine for Grounded, Compositional, and Explainable Reasoningcited by 16
  16. 2022Yes-Yes-Yes: Proactive Data Collection for ACL Rolling Review and Beyondcited by 12
  17. 2024ReviewFlow: Intelligent Scaffolding to Support Academic Peer Reviewingcited by 12
  18. 2023Less is More: Mitigate Spurious Correlations for Open-Domain Dialogue Response Generation Models by Causal Discoverycited by 10
  19. 2024NICE: To Optimize In-Context Examples or Not?cited by 9
  20. 2022Journal Impact Factor and Peer Review Thoroughness and Helpfulness: A Supervised Machine Learning Studycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 10.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026PeerCheck: Enhancing LLM-Generated Academic Reviews Towards Human-Level Quality
  2. 2025MMReview: A Multidisciplinary and Multimodal Benchmark for LLM-Based Peer Review Automation
  3. 2026LLM-Based Scientific Peer Review: Methods, Benchmarks, and Reliability Challenges
  4. 2026RbtAct: Rebuttal as Supervision for Actionable Review Feedback Generation
  5. 2026ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation
  6. 2026PeerPrism: Peer Evaluation Expertise vs Review-writing AI
  7. 2026When AI Reviews Train AI Reviewers: Scientific-Judgment Collapse and Mitigation
  8. 2025Aspect-Guided Multi-Level Perturbation Analysis of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review