From Passive Generation to Investigation: A Proactive Scientific Peer Review Agent
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Effective peer review requires adaptive investigation that responds to evidence emerging from each paper. Existing LLM-based reviewers largely organize the review process around predefined workflows, leaving limited scope for emerging evidence to reshape investigation. We propose ProReviewer, an evidence-driven review agent that formulates reviewing as a Markov Decision Process, with a structured review log forming the core of its state. At each step, the agent uses accumulated findings to decide what to inspect next and when to conclude. As new evidence emerges, it updates the log by revising claim statuses, resolving open questions, and recording new findings. Each point in the final review cites supporting log entries, making its judgments traceable to the recorded evidence. On 1,000 held-out ICLR 2026 papers, the trained 8B ProReviewer achieves the highest average score among all compared methods, including those built on a 397B model; human evaluators prefer its reviews over all baselines on three of four review-quality dimensions.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 19 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2026.
Builds on
19 of 42 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2026DeepReviewer 2.0: A Traceable Agentic System for Auditable Scientific Peer Review3 Mar
- 2025The AI Scientist-v2: Workshop-Level Automated Scientific Discovery via Agentic Tree Search10 Apr
Other references · 17
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
- 2021WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedbackcited by 1,745
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
- 2024The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated Open-Ended Scientific Discoverycited by 1,071
- 2021Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Modelscited by 886
- 2025Memory in the Age of AI Agentscited by 303
- 2025Memory-R1: Enhancing Large Language Model Agents to Manage and Utilize Memories via Reinforcement Learningcited by 237
- 2023Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysiscited by 200
- 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 122
- 2024Are We There Yet? Revealing the Risks of Utilizing Large Language Models in Scholarly Peer Reviewcited by 53
- 2023GPT4 is Slightly Helpful for Peer-Review Assistance: A Pilot Studycited by 40
5 more
- 2026AI-Assisted Peer Review at Scale: The AAAI-26 AI Review Pilotcited by 19
- 2025ReviewerToo: Should AI Join The Program Committee? A Look At The Future of Peer Reviewcited by 16
- 2025Aspect-Guided Multi-Level Perturbation Analysis of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Reviewcited by 8
- 2024Reviewer2: Optimizing Review Generation Through Prompt Generationcited by 7
- 2026ScholarPeer: A Context-Aware Multi-Agent Framework for Automated Peer Reviewcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gapcited by 9
- 2026The Emerging AI Paper-Review Arms Race: Adversarial Co-Evolution in Scholarly Publishingcited by 1
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-Rcited by 0
- 2026A Missing Piece for Trustworthy AI Reviewers: From Benchmarking Rhetorical Robustness to SciCore Reviewcited by 0
- 2026A Missing Piece for Trustworthy AI Reviewers: From Benchmarking Rhetorical Robustness to SciCore Review30 Sep 2026
- 2026The Emerging AI Paper-Review Arms Race: Adversarial Co-Evolution in Scholarly Publishing7 Sep 2026
- 2026More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-R3 Sep 2026
- 2026Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gap29 Jun 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024CycleResearcher: Improving Automated Research via Automated Review
- 2026EGTR-Review: Efficient Evidence-Grounded Scientific Peer Review Generation via Multi-Agent Teacher Distillation
- 2025ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviews
- 2024ResearchAgent: Iterative Research Idea Generation over Scientific Literature with Large Language Models
- 2026Towards Automating Scientific Review with Google's Paper Assistant Tool
- 2026ReviewGuard: Aligning LLM-Assisted Peer Review with Long-Term Scientific Impact
- 2025ReviewRL: Towards Automated Scientific Review with RL
- 2026LitReview Arena: Evaluating Literature Review Agents with Battle-Style Peer Review Platform