AI-Assisted Authoring for Transparent, Data-Driven Documents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We introduce _transparent documents_, interactive web-based scholarly articles which allow readers to explore the relationship to the underlying data by hovering over fragments of text, and present an LLM-based tool for authoring transparent documents, building on recent developments in data provenance for general-purpose programming languages. As a target platform, our implementation uses Fluid, an open source programming language with a provenance-tracking runtime. Our agent-based tool supports a human author during the creation of transparent documents, identifying fragments of text which can be computed from data, such as numerical values selected from records or computed by aggregations like sum and mean, comparatives and superlatives like _better than_ and _largest_, trend-adjectives like _growing_, and similar quantitative or semi-quantitative phrases, and then attempts to synthesise a suitable Fluid query over the data which generates the target string. The resulting expression is inserted into the article's web page, turning the static text fragment into an interactable data-driven element able to reveal the data that underwrites the natural language claim. We evaluate our approach on a subset of SciGen, an open source dataset consisting of tables from scientific articles and their corresponding descriptions, which we extend with hand-generated counterfactual test cases to evaluate how well machine-generated expressions generalise. Our results show that gpt4o is often able to synthesise compound expressions extensionally compatible with our gold solutions.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Oct 2025.
Builds on
17 of 43 references.
References · 17
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2016Parsing Argumentation Structures in Persuasive Essayscited by 101
- 2017JFLEG: A Fluency Corpus and Benchmark for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 97
- 2023ChatGPT or Grammarly? Evaluating ChatGPT on Grammatical Error Correction Benchmarkcited by 77
- 2024SciFIBench: Benchmarking Large Multimodal Models for Scientific Figure Interpretationcited by 48
- 2025Can LLM feedback enhance review quality? A randomized study of 20K reviews at ICLR 2025cited by 47
- 2023Errors are Useful Prompts: Instruction Guided Task Programming with Verifier-Assisted Iterative Promptingcited by 46
- 2024AI-Driven Review Systems: Evaluating LLMs in Scalable and Bias-Aware Academic Reviewscited by 44
- 2017Neural End-to-End Learning for Computational Argumentation Miningcited by 41
- 2024Can Large Language Models perform Relation-based Argument Mining?cited by 23
- 2018Sentence-State LSTM for Text Representationcited by 22
- 2020Argument Mining Driven Analysis of Peer-Reviewscited by 16
5 more
- 2018Smoke: Fine-grained Lineage at Interactive Speedcited by 6
- 2023When Reviewers Lock Horn: Finding Disagreement in Scientific Peer Reviewscited by 2
- 2021Linked visualisations via Galois dependenciescited by 1
- 2024Cognacy Queries over Dependence Graphs for Transparent Visualisationscited by 1
- 2025Meaning Beyond Truth Conditions: Evaluating Discourse Level Understanding via Anaphora Accessibilitycited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.