LazyReview A Dataset for Uncovering Lazy Thinking in NLP Peer Reviews
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
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2019SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Textcited by 1,414
- 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
- 2023Large Language Modelscited by 780
- 2021Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategiescited by 743
- 2024Yi: Open Foundation Models by 01.AIcited by 719
- 2023How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resourcescited by 408
- 2023Camels in a Changing Climate: Enhancing LM Adaptation with Tulu 2cited by 229
- 2022Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learningcited by 163
- 2023Are Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models just In-Context Learning?cited by 109
- 2023Exploring the Benefits of Training Expert Language Models over Instruction Tuningcited by 80
20 more
- 2024LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewingcited by 62
- 2022NLPeer: A Unified Resource for the Computational Study of Peer Reviewcited by 60
- 2023OpenICL: An Open-Source Framework for In-context Learningcited by 51
- 2021Logic-Driven Context Extension and Data Augmentation for Logical Reasoning of Textcited by 46
- 2021From LSAT: The Progress and Challenges of Complex Reasoningcited by 43
- 2024SciRIFF: A Resource to Enhance Language Model Instruction-Following over Scientific Literaturecited by 41
- 2021DISAPERE: A Dataset for Discourse Structure in Peer Review Discussionscited by 36
- 2020What Can We Do to Improve Peer Review in NLP?cited by 32
- 2024Can LLMs Reason with Rules? Logic Scaffolding for Stress-Testing and Improving LLMscited by 28
- 2024Evaluating the Elementary Multilingual Capabilities of Large Language Models with MultiQcited by 27
- 2024What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?cited by 25
- 2023Automatic Analysis of Substantiation in Scientific Peer Reviewscited by 19
- 2023Exploring Jiu-Jitsu Argumentation for Writing Peer Review Rebuttalscited by 18
- 2023Specialist or Generalist? Instruction Tuning for Specific NLP Taskscited by 17
- 2022NELLIE: A Neuro-Symbolic Inference Engine for Grounded, Compositional, and Explainable Reasoningcited by 16
- 2022Yes-Yes-Yes: Proactive Data Collection for ACL Rolling Review and Beyondcited by 12
- 2024ReviewFlow: Intelligent Scaffolding to Support Academic Peer Reviewingcited by 12
- 2023Less is More: Mitigate Spurious Correlations for Open-Domain Dialogue Response Generation Models by Causal Discoverycited by 10
- 2024NICE: To Optimize In-Context Examples or Not?cited by 9
- 2022Journal Impact Factor and Peer Review Thoroughness and Helpfulness: A Supervised Machine Learning Studycited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 10.
13 papers.
Sort:
By area:
- 2025The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authorscited by 16
- 2026RebuttalAgent: Strategic Persuasion in Academic Rebuttal via Theory of Mindcited by 6
- 2025ReviewScore: Misinformed Peer Review Detection with Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2026Reward Modeling for Scientific Writing Evaluationcited by 2
- 2026From Isolated Scoring to Collaborative Ranking: A Comparison-Native Framework for LLM-Based Paper Evaluationcited by 2
- 2026PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Qualitycited by 2
- 2025Language Models Should be Used to Surface the Unwritten Code of Science and Societycited by 1
- 2026Commitment Checklist: Auditing Author Commitments in Peer Reviewcited by 1
- 2026Is Peer Review Really in Decline? Analyzing Review Quality across Venues and Timecited by 0
- 2026Reviewing the Reviewer: LLM-Assisted Reviewer Feedback Generation for Guideline Compliancecited by 0
- 2026Are Non-English Papers Reviewed Fairly? Language-of-Study Bias in NLP Peer Reviewscited by 0
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-Rcited by 0
1 more
- 2026How Much Were You Told? Measuring External Information in Peer Reviews23 Sep 2026
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-R3 Sep 2026
- 2026PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Quality27 Apr 2026
- 2026Are Non-English Papers Reviewed Fairly? Language-of-Study Bias in NLP Peer Reviews8 Apr 2026
- 2026From Isolated Scoring to Collaborative Ranking: A Comparison-Native Framework for LLM-Based Paper Evaluation18 Mar 2026
- 2026RebuttalAgent: Strategic Persuasion in Academic Rebuttal via Theory of Mind22 Jan 2026
- 2026Is Peer Review Really in Decline? Analyzing Review Quality across Venues and Time21 Jan 2026
- 2026Reviewing the Reviewer: LLM-Assisted Reviewer Feedback Generation for Guideline Compliance17 Jan 2026
- 2026Reward Modeling for Scientific Writing Evaluation16 Jan 2026
- 2026Commitment Checklist: Auditing Author Commitments in Peer Review8 Jan 2026
- 2025ReviewScore: Misinformed Peer Review Detection with Large Language Models25 Sep 2025
- 2025The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors31 Aug 2025
1 more
- 2026Reward Modeling for Scientific Writing Evaluationcited by 2
- 2026Reward Modeling for Scientific Writing Evaluation16 Jan 2026
- 2025The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authorscited by 16
- 2026RebuttalAgent: Strategic Persuasion in Academic Rebuttal via Theory of Mindcited by 6
- 2025ReviewScore: Misinformed Peer Review Detection with Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2026From Isolated Scoring to Collaborative Ranking: A Comparison-Native Framework for LLM-Based Paper Evaluationcited by 2
- 2026PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Qualitycited by 2
- 2025Language Models Should be Used to Surface the Unwritten Code of Science and Societycited by 1
- 2026Commitment Checklist: Auditing Author Commitments in Peer Reviewcited by 1
- 2026Is Peer Review Really in Decline? Analyzing Review Quality across Venues and Timecited by 0
- 2026Reviewing the Reviewer: LLM-Assisted Reviewer Feedback Generation for Guideline Compliancecited by 0
- 2026Are Non-English Papers Reviewed Fairly? Language-of-Study Bias in NLP Peer Reviewscited by 0
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-Rcited by 0
- 2026How Much Were You Told? Measuring External Information in Peer Reviewscited by 0
- 2026How Much Were You Told? Measuring External Information in Peer Reviews23 Sep 2026
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-R3 Sep 2026
- 2026PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Quality27 Apr 2026
- 2026Are Non-English Papers Reviewed Fairly? Language-of-Study Bias in NLP Peer Reviews8 Apr 2026
- 2026From Isolated Scoring to Collaborative Ranking: A Comparison-Native Framework for LLM-Based Paper Evaluation18 Mar 2026
- 2026RebuttalAgent: Strategic Persuasion in Academic Rebuttal via Theory of Mind22 Jan 2026
- 2026Is Peer Review Really in Decline? Analyzing Review Quality across Venues and Time21 Jan 2026
- 2026Reviewing the Reviewer: LLM-Assisted Reviewer Feedback Generation for Guideline Compliance17 Jan 2026
- 2026Commitment Checklist: Auditing Author Commitments in Peer Review8 Jan 2026
- 2025ReviewScore: Misinformed Peer Review Detection with Large Language Models25 Sep 2025
- 2025The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors31 Aug 2025
- 2025Language Models Should be Used to Surface the Unwritten Code of Science and Society25 May 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026PeerCheck: Enhancing LLM-Generated Academic Reviews Towards Human-Level Quality
- 2025MMReview: A Multidisciplinary and Multimodal Benchmark for LLM-Based Peer Review Automation
- 2026LLM-Based Scientific Peer Review: Methods, Benchmarks, and Reliability Challenges
- 2026RbtAct: Rebuttal as Supervision for Actionable Review Feedback Generation
- 2026ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation
- 2026PeerPrism: Peer Evaluation Expertise vs Review-writing AI
- 2026When AI Reviews Train AI Reviewers: Scientific-Judgment Collapse and Mitigation
- 2025Aspect-Guided Multi-Level Perturbation Analysis of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review