mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Metag: A dataset to build agentic meta-reviewing capabilities

arXiv 2608.20488 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2026cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents

Abstract (arXiv)

AI tools increasingly support tasks across the scientific research cycle, from experiment design and manuscript preparation to peer review. At the same time, the continuing growth in conference submissions has increased the burden on meta-reviewers, who must synthesize reviewer feedback, author rebuttals, and manuscript revisions. To address this concern, this paper introduces Metag, a dataset to accelerate the development of meta-reviewing agents, specifically to identify changes made to scientific articles during the review-rebuttal process. Each instance contains a reviewer concern, the author's proposed resolution, and the manuscript diffs implementing the stated change. Metag is collected by obtaining manuscript versions from before the review deadline and after acceptance, computing differences between the two documents, and asking human annotators to align these differences with action items from OpenReview discussions. The resulting dataset consists of 349 high-quality action items tied to paper differences and will enable building methods to empower meta reviewers to quickly identify whether authors have addressed reviewer statements and where in the paper those changes have been made, resulting in additional transparency and traceability throughout peer review. The dataset is publicly available at https://github.com/microsoft/Metag-dataset.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2026.

Builds on

14 of 28 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  2. 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,686
  3. 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 877
  4. 2026Kimi K2.5: Visual Agentic Intelligencecited by 449
  5. 2024Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviewscited by 160
  6. 2022Understanding Iterative Revision from Human-Written Textcited by 56
  7. 2022Revise and Resubmit: An Intertextual Model of Text-based Collaboration in Peer Reviewcited by 37
  8. 2023ARIES: A Corpus of Scientific Paper Edits Made in Response to Peer Reviewscited by 34
  9. 2022arXivEdits: Understanding the Human Revision Process in Scientific Writingcited by 26
  10. 2024What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?cited by 24
  11. 2022Towards Automated Document Revision: Grammatical Error Correction, Fluency Edits, and Beyondcited by 20
  12. 2024SciDQA: A Deep Reading Comprehension Dataset over Scientific Paperscited by 15
2 more
  1. 2023Scientific Opinion Summarization: Paper Meta-review Generation Dataset, Methods, and Evaluationcited by 14
  2. 2024cPAPERS: A Dataset of Situated and Multimodal Interactive Conversations in Scientific Paperscited by 10

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025AI and the Future of Academic Peer Review
  2. 2026Towards Automating Scientific Review with Google's Paper Assistant Tool
  3. 2026LitReview Arena: Evaluating Literature Review Agents with Battle-Style Peer Review Platform
  4. 2025ReviewAgents: Bridging the Gap Between Human and AI-Generated Paper Reviews
  5. 2025ReviewRL: Towards Automated Scientific Review with RL
  6. 2026RbtAct: Rebuttal as Supervision for Actionable Review Feedback Generation
  7. 2026Benchmarking Agentic Review Systems
  8. 2026Checkpoints Are Not Enough: Trust Calibration in CoSLR, a Human-AI System for Systematic Literature Reviews