Is LLM a Reliable Reviewer? A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLM on Automatic Paper Reviewing Tasks

Abstract

The use of large language models (LLM), especially ChatGPT, to help with research has come into practice. Researchers use it for timely advice and hope to obtain in-depth feedback. However, can LLM be a qualified and reliable reviewer? Although there already exist several review-related datasets, few works have carefully and thoroughly inspected model’s capability as a reviewer, especially the correctness of generated reviews. In this paper, we first evaluate GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (the current top-performing LLM) on 2 types of tasks under different settings: the score prediction task and the review generation task. In addition, we propose a dataset containing 197 review-revision multiple-choice questions (RR-MCQ) with detailed labels from the review-rebuttal forum in ICLR-2023. By asking questions from technical details to the overall presentation and quality, our RR-MCQ data provides a more complete model ability assessment. The results show that LLM is generally helpful, but great caution is needed as it always makes mistakes. Although it can give passable decisions (> 60% accuracy) on single options, completely correct answers are still rare (about 20%); models are still weak on long paper processing, zero-shot scoring, and giving critical feedback like human reviewers.

Resources

Details