Mind the Blind Spots: A Focus-Level Evaluation Framework for LLM Reviews
Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2025 (EMNLP 2025)🏆 SAC Highlight
Abstract
Peer review underpins scientific progress, but it is increasingly strained by reviewer shortages and growing workloads. Large Language Models (LLMs) can automatically draft reviews now, but determining whether LLM-generated reviews are trustworthy requires systematic evaluation. Researchers have evaluated LLM reviews at either surface-level (e.g., BLEU and ROUGE) or content-level (e.g., specificity and factual accuracy). Yet it remains uncertain whether LLM-generated reviews attend to the same critical facets that human experts weigh—the strengths and weaknesses that ultimately drive an accept-or-reject decision. We introduce a focus-level evaluation framework that operationalizes the focus as a normalized distribution of attention across predefined facets in paper reviews. Based on the framework, we developed an automatic focus-level evaluation pipeline based on two sets of facets: target (e.g., problem, method, and experiment) and aspect (e.g., validity, clarity, and novelty), leveraging 676 paper reviews from OpenReview that consists of 3,657 strengths and weaknesses identified from human experts. The comparison of focus distributions between LLMs and human experts showed that the off-the-shelf LLMs consistently have a more biased focus towards examining technical validity while significantly overlooking novelty assessment when criticizing papers.Dataset: https://figshare.com/s/d5adf26c802527dd0f62
BibTeX
@inproceedings{shin-etal-2025-mind,
title = "Mind the Blind Spots: A Focus-Level Evaluation Framework for {LLM} Reviews",
author = "Shin, Hyungyu and
Tang, Jingyu and
Lee, Yoonjoo and
Kim, Nayoung and
Lim, Hyunseung and
Cho, Ji Yong and
Hong, Hwajung and
Lee, Moontae and
Kim, Juho",
editor = "Christodoulopoulos, Christos and
Chakraborty, Tanmoy and
Rose, Carolyn and
Peng, Violet",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
month = nov,
year = "2025",
address = "Suzhou, China",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2025.emnlp-main.1805/",
pages = "35618--35644",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-332-6",
abstract = "Peer review underpins scientific progress, but it is increasingly strained by reviewer shortages and growing workloads. Large Language Models (LLMs) can automatically draft reviews now, but determining whether LLM-generated reviews are trustworthy requires systematic evaluation. Researchers have evaluated LLM reviews at either surface-level (e.g., BLEU and ROUGE) or content-level (e.g., specificity and factual accuracy). Yet it remains uncertain whether LLM-generated reviews attend to the same critical facets that human experts weigh{---}the strengths and weaknesses that ultimately drive an accept-or-reject decision. We introduce a focus-level evaluation framework that operationalizes the focus as a normalized distribution of attention across predefined facets in paper reviews. Based on the framework, we developed an automatic focus-level evaluation pipeline based on two sets of facets: target (e.g., problem, method, and experiment) and aspect (e.g., validity, clarity, and novelty), leveraging 676 paper reviews from OpenReview that consists of 3,657 strengths and weaknesses identified from human experts. The comparison of focus distributions between LLMs and human experts showed that the off-the-shelf LLMs consistently have a more biased focus towards examining technical validity while significantly overlooking novelty assessment when criticizing papers.Dataset: https://figshare.com/s/d5adf26c802527dd0f62"
}