Does AI Reviewer See the Full Picture? Attacking and Defending Multimodal Peer Review
On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security
Abstract (arXiv)
The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) into scientific peer-review workflows introduces novel and significant risks for adversarial manipulation, especially given the multimodal nature of scientific papers where figures, not just text, convey core evidence. This creates a significant gap: current robustness studies on AI peer-review are overwhelmingly text-only. Moreover, the problem is distinct from standard jailbreaking, as a peer-review attack seeks to induce a domain-specific, targeted failure (e.g., "inflate this score") rather than a general safety policy violation, for which no practical defenses exist. To address this, we introduce PaperGuard, the first comprehensive benchmark designed to systematically evaluate and defend AI-generated peer-review against these domain-specific, cross-modal attacks. Our framework is built on three pillars: (1) a new multimodal peer-review dataset spanning multiple scientific domains; (2) a unified suite of attacks, including black-box prompt injections and white-box perturbations, specifically designed to target both text (GCG) and figures (PGD); and (3) a practical defense, motivated by the long-context challenge of academic papers, that uses chunk-based embedding search to efficiently localize and mitigate harmful instructions. Our extensive experiments, conducted across state-of-the-art models, confirm that AI reviewers are pervasively vulnerable. PaperGuard establishes the foundational benchmark, protocols, and actionable defense necessary to pioneer trustworthy, attack-resilient AI-assisted scholarly reviewing.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 41 of its 57 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2026.
Builds on
41 of 57 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 40
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,383
- 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
- 2020Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attackscited by 1,442
- 2018Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examplescited by 1,259
- 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,216
- 2018Attention-based Deep Multiple Instance Learningcited by 1,077
- 2024The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated Open-Ended Scientific Discoverycited by 1,002
- 2023Towards General Text Embeddings with Multi-stage Contrastive Learningcited by 705
28 more
- 2019Is BERT Really Robust? A Strong Baseline for Natural Language Attack on Text Classification and Entailmentcited by 663
- 2020BERT-ATTACK: Adversarial Attack Against BERT Using BERTcited by 488
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model (LLM) Security and Privacy: The Good, the Bad, and the Uglycited by 380
- 2018Black-box Generation of Adversarial Text Sequences to Evade Deep Learning Classifierscited by 341
- 2017Synthetic and Natural Noise Both Break Neural Machine Translationcited by 304
- 2021Hidden Killer: Invisible Textual Backdoor Attacks with Syntactic Triggercited by 203
- 2023Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysiscited by 195
- 2021Mind the Style of Text! Adversarial and Backdoor Attacks Based on Text Style Transfercited by 147
- 2018A Dataset of Peer Reviews (PeerRead): Collection, Insights and NLP Applicationscited by 135
- 2024E5-V: Universal Embeddings with Multimodal Large Language Modelscited by 123
- 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 118
- 2024Is LLM-as-a-Judge Robust? Investigating Universal Adversarial Attacks on Zero-shot LLM Assessmentcited by 117
- 2024AgentReview: Exploring Peer Review Dynamics with LLM Agentscited by 92
- 2023Verbosity Bias in Preference Labeling by Large Language Modelscited by 89
- 2021Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing?cited by 63
- 2024LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewingcited by 62
- 2022NLPeer: A Unified Resource for the Computational Study of Peer Reviewcited by 60
- 2025Large language models for automated scholarly paper review: A surveycited by 59
- 2020Generating Natural Language Attacks in a Hard Label Black Box Settingcited by 50
- 2024Peer Review as A Multi-Turn and Long-Context Dialogue with Role-Based Interactionscited by 43
- 2021MReD: A Meta-Review Dataset for Structure-Controllable Text Generationcited by 42
- 2023GPT4 is Slightly Helpful for Peer-Review Assistance: A Pilot Studycited by 40
- 2024Automated Peer Reviewing in Paper SEA: Standardization, Evaluation, and Analysiscited by 33
- 2025ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviewscited by 28
- 2024What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?cited by 24
- 2025Breaking the Reviewer: Assessing the Vulnerability of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review Under Textual Adversarial Attackscited by 14
- 2025MMReview: A Multidisciplinary and Multimodal Benchmark for LLM-Based Peer Review Automationcited by 9
- 2020Automatic generation of reviews of scientific paperscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025AI and the Future of Academic Peer Review
- 2026PeerPrism: Peer Evaluation Expertise vs Review-writing AI
- 2026LLM-Based Scientific Peer Review: Methods, Benchmarks, and Reliability Challenges
- 2026How Can Rhetoric Reward-Hack AI Reviewers? Dissecting Rhetorical Sensitivity in AI-Based Peer Review
- 2025Aspect-Guided Multi-Level Perturbation Analysis of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review
- 2025BadScientist: Can a Research Agent Write Convincing but Unsound Papers that Fool LLM Reviewers?
- 2026Benchmarking Agentic Review Systems
- 2026LitReview Arena: Evaluating Literature Review Agents with Battle-Style Peer Review Platform