# Peerispect: Claim Verification in Scientific Peer Reviews

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.17667 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.17667/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 12 of its 26 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [Passage Re-ranking with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.04085/) (2019)
- [Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14974/) (2020)
- [A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03011/) (2021)
- [FENICE: Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02270/) (2024)
- [The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04484/) (2025)
- [The Extractive-Abstractive Spectrum: Uncovering Verifiability Trade-offs in LLM Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.17375/) (2024)
- [Publication Trends in Artificial Intelligence Conferences: The Rise of Super Prolific Authors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.07793/) (2024)
- [exHarmony: Authorship and Citations for Benchmarking the Reviewer Assignment Problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.07683/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [The Emerging AI Paper-Review Arms Race: Adversarial Co-Evolution in Scholarly Publishing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.07713/) (2026)
- [Peerify: Benchmarking Peer-Review Claim Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.25046/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Peer review is central to scientific publishing, yet reviewers frequently include claims that are subjective, rhetorical, or misaligned with the submitted work. Assessing whether review statements are factual and verifiable is crucial for fairness and accountability. At the scale of modern conferences and journals, manually inspecting the grounding of such claims is infeasible. We present Peerispect, an interactive system that operationalizes claim-level verification in peer reviews by extracting check-worthy claims from peer reviews, retrieving relevant evidence from the manuscript, and verifying the claims through natural language inference. Results are presented through a visual interface that highlights evidence directly in the paper, enabling rapid inspection and interpretation. Peerispect is designed as a modular Information Retrieval (IR) pipeline, supporting alternative retrievers, rerankers, and verifiers, and is intended for use by reviewers, authors, and program committees. We demonstrate Peerispect through a live, publicly available demo (https://app.reviewer.ly/app/peerispect) and API services (https://github.com/Reviewerly-Inc/Peerispect), accompanied by a video tutorial (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc9RkvkUh14).