Allocate Marginal Reviews to Borderline Papers Using LLM Comparative Ranking
#Large Language Models #Peer Review #Machine Learning Conferences #Bradley-Terry Model #Paper Assignment #Academic Research #LLM Ranking
📌 Key Takeaways
- Researchers propose using LLMs to identify borderline papers before the human peer-review process begins.
- The system uses pairwise comparisons and the Bradley-Terry model to create a comparative ranking of submissions.
- Extra review capacity is directed toward papers near the acceptance boundary rather than being distributed randomly.
- The goal is to optimize limited human reviewer resources in the face of skyrocketing submission numbers.
📖 Full Retelling
🏷️ Themes
Artificial Intelligence, Academic Publishing, Technology
📚 Related People & Topics
Large language model
Type of machine learning model
A large language model (LLM) is a language model trained with self-supervised machine learning on a vast amount of text, designed for natural language processing tasks, especially language generation. The largest and most capable LLMs are generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) that provide the c...
Peer review
Evaluation by peers with similar expertise
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve p...
🔗 Entity Intersection Graph
Connections for Large language model:
- 🌐 Reinforcement learning (7 shared articles)
- 🌐 Machine learning (5 shared articles)
- 🌐 Theory of mind (2 shared articles)
- 🌐 Generative artificial intelligence (2 shared articles)
- 🌐 Automation (2 shared articles)
- 🌐 Rag (2 shared articles)
- 🌐 Scientific method (2 shared articles)
- 🌐 Mafia (disambiguation) (1 shared articles)
- 🌐 Robustness (1 shared articles)
- 🌐 Capture the flag (1 shared articles)
- 👤 Clinical Practice (1 shared articles)
- 🌐 Wearable computer (1 shared articles)
📄 Original Source Content
arXiv:2602.06078v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper argues that large ML conferences should allocate marginal review capacity primarily to papers near the acceptance boundary, rather than spreading extra reviews via random or affinity-driven heuristics. We propose using LLM-based comparative ranking (via pairwise comparisons and a Bradley--Terry model) to identify a borderline band \emph{before} human reviewing and to allocate \emph{marginal} reviewer capacity at assignment time. Concr