Live
Black Hat USAAI BusinessBlack Hat AsiaAI BusinessSingle-cell imaging and machine learning reveal hidden coordination in algae's response to light stress - MSNGoogle News: Machine LearningGoogle Dramatically Upgrades Storage in Google AI Pro - Thurrott.comGoogle News: GeminiOpenAI Won't Save ARKK (BATS:ARKK) - seekingalpha.comGoogle News: OpenAIAI Can Describe Human Experiences But Lacks Experience In An Actual ‘Body’ - eurasiareview.comGoogle News: AIAI & Digital Tools on Construction Projects: Contract Risks to Address Before Peak Season - JD SupraGoogle News: AIAI Revolution: Action & Insight - businesstravelexecutive.comGoogle News: Machine LearningNavigating the Challenges of Cross-functional Teams: the Role of Governance and Common GoalsDEV Community[Side B] Pursuing OSS Quality Assurance with AI: Achieving 369 Tests, 97% Coverage, and GIL-Free CompatibilityDEV Community[Side A] Completely Defending Python from OOM Kills: The BytesIO Trap and D-MemFS 'Hard Quota' Design PhilosophyDEV CommunityFrom Attention Economy to Thinking Economy: The AI ChallengeDEV CommunityHow We're Approaching a County-Level Education Data System EngagementDEV CommunityI Built a Portable Text Editor for Windows — One .exe File, No Installation, Forever FreeDEV CommunityBlack Hat USAAI BusinessBlack Hat AsiaAI BusinessSingle-cell imaging and machine learning reveal hidden coordination in algae's response to light stress - MSNGoogle News: Machine LearningGoogle Dramatically Upgrades Storage in Google AI Pro - Thurrott.comGoogle News: GeminiOpenAI Won't Save ARKK (BATS:ARKK) - seekingalpha.comGoogle News: OpenAIAI Can Describe Human Experiences But Lacks Experience In An Actual ‘Body’ - eurasiareview.comGoogle News: AIAI & Digital Tools on Construction Projects: Contract Risks to Address Before Peak Season - JD SupraGoogle News: AIAI Revolution: Action & Insight - businesstravelexecutive.comGoogle News: Machine LearningNavigating the Challenges of Cross-functional Teams: the Role of Governance and Common GoalsDEV Community[Side B] Pursuing OSS Quality Assurance with AI: Achieving 369 Tests, 97% Coverage, and GIL-Free CompatibilityDEV Community[Side A] Completely Defending Python from OOM Kills: The BytesIO Trap and D-MemFS 'Hard Quota' Design PhilosophyDEV CommunityFrom Attention Economy to Thinking Economy: The AI ChallengeDEV CommunityHow We're Approaching a County-Level Education Data System EngagementDEV CommunityI Built a Portable Text Editor for Windows — One .exe File, No Installation, Forever FreeDEV Community

Defend: Automated Rebuttals for Peer Review with Minimal Author Guidance

arXivby [Submitted on 28 Mar 2026]March 31, 20262 min read1 views
Source Quiz

arXiv:2603.27360v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Rebuttal generation is a critical component of the peer review process for scientific papers, enabling authors to clarify misunderstandings, correct factual inaccuracies, and guide reviewers toward a more accurate evaluation. We observe that Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle to perform targeted refutation and maintain accurate factual grounding when used directly for rebuttal generation, highlighting the need for structured reasoning and author intervention. To address this, in the paper, we introduce DEFEND an LLM based tool designed t — Jyotsana Khatri, Manasi Patwardhan

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Rebuttal generation is a critical component of the peer review process for scientific papers, enabling authors to clarify misunderstandings, correct factual inaccuracies, and guide reviewers toward a more accurate evaluation. We observe that Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle to perform targeted refutation and maintain accurate factual grounding when used directly for rebuttal generation, highlighting the need for structured reasoning and author intervention. To address this, in the paper, we introduce DEFEND an LLM based tool designed to explicitly execute the underlying reasoning process of automated rebuttal generation, while keeping the author-in-the-loop. As opposed to writing the rebuttals from scratch, the author needs to only drive the reasoning process with minimal intervention, leading an efficient approach with minimal effort and less cognitive load. We compare DEFEND against three other paradigms: (i) Direct rebuttal generation using LLM (DRG), (ii) Segment-wise rebuttal generation using LLM (SWRG), and (iii) Sequential approach (SA) of segment-wise rebuttal generation without author intervention. To enable finegrained evaluation, we extend the ReviewCritique dataset, creating review segmentation, deficiency, error type annotations, rebuttal-action labels, and mapping to gold rebuttal segments. Experimental results and a user study demonstrate that directly using LLMs perform poorly in factual correctness and targeted refutation. Segment-wise generation and the automated sequential approach with author-in-the-loop, substantially improve factual correctness and strength of refutation.

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2603.27360 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2603.27360v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.27360

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Jyotsana Khatri [view email] [v1] Sat, 28 Mar 2026 18:12:31 UTC (958 KB)

Was this article helpful?

Sign in to highlight and annotate this article

AI
Ask AI about this article
Powered by AI News Hub · full article context loaded
Ready

Conversation starters

Ask anything about this article…

Daily AI Digest

Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.

More about

researchpaperarxiv

Knowledge Map

Knowledge Map
TopicsEntitiesSource
Defend: Aut…researchpaperarxivaiartificial-…arXiv

Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph

This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.

Knowledge Graph100 articles · 175 connections
Scroll to zoom · drag to pan · click to open

Discussion

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!

More in Research Papers