EchoReview: Learning Peer Review from the Echoes of Scientific Citations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As the volume of scientific submissions continues to grow rapidly, traditional peer review systems are facing unprecedented scalability pressures, highlighting the urgent need for automated reviewing methods that are both scalable and reliable. Existing supervised fine-tuning approaches based on real review data are fundamentally constrained by single-source of data as well as the inherent subjectivity and inconsistency of human reviews, limiting their ability to support high-quality automated reviewers. To address these issues, we propose EchoReview, a citation-context-driven data synthesis framework that systematically mines implicit collective evaluative signals from academic citations and transforms scientific community's long-term judgments into structured review-style data. Based on this pipeline, we construct EchoReview-16K, the first large-scale, cross-conference, and cross-year citation-driven review dataset, and train an automated reviewer, EchoReviewer-7B. Experimental results demonstrate that EchoReviewer-7B can achieve significant and stable improvements on core review dimensions such as evidence support and review comprehensiveness, validating citation context as a robust and effective data paradigm for reliable automated peer review.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Jan 2026.
Builds on
19 of 33 references.
References · 19
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,713
- 2024LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Modelscited by 1,442
- 2024Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Large Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 641
- 2024MinerU: An Open-Source Solution for Precise Document Content Extractioncited by 255
- 2024CycleResearcher: Improving Automated Research via Automated Reviewcited by 142
- 2018A Dataset of Peer Reviews (PeerRead): Collection, Insights and NLP Applicationscited by 135
- 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 118
- 2025DeepReview: Improving LLM-based Paper Review with Human-like Deep Thinking Processcited by 97
- 2024AgentReview: Exploring Peer Review Dynamics with LLM Agentscited by 92
- 2025Large language models for automated scholarly paper review: A surveycited by 59
- 2021Inconsistency in Conference Peer Review: Revisiting the 2014 NeurIPS Experimentcited by 49
7 more
- 2024Peer Review as A Multi-Turn and Long-Context Dialogue with Role-Based Interactionscited by 43
- 2023GPT4 is Slightly Helpful for Peer-Review Assistance: A Pilot Studycited by 40
- 2024Automated Focused Feedback Generation for Scientific Writing Assistancecited by 33
- 2025TreeReview: A Dynamic Tree of Questions Framework for Deep and Efficient LLM-based Scientific Peer Reviewcited by 31
- 2020An Open Review of OpenReview: A Critical Analysis of the Machine Learning Conference Review Processcited by 23
- 2025Can LLMs Identify Critical Limitations within Scientific Research? A Systematic Evaluation on AI Research Paperscited by 19
- 2024Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality?cited by 17
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.