Abstract
One of the most important yet onerous tasks in the academic peer-reviewing process is composing meta-reviews, which involves assimilating diverse opinions from multiple expert peers, formulating one’s self-judgment as a senior expert, and then summarizing all these perspectives into a concise holistic overview to make an overall recommendation. This process is time-consuming and can be compromised by human factors like fatigue, inconsistency, missing tiny details, etc. Given the latest major developments in Large Language Models (LLMs), it is very compelling to rigorously study whether LLMs can help meta-reviewers perform this important task better. In this paper, we perform a case study with three popular LLMs, i.e., GPT-3.5, LLaMA2, and PaLM2, to assist meta-reviewers in better comprehending multiple experts’ perspectives by generating a controlled multi-perspective-summary (MPS) of their opinions. To achieve this, we prompt three LLMs with different types/levels of prompts based on the recently proposed TELeR taxonomy. Finally, we perform a detailed qualitative study of the MPSs generated by the LLMs and report our findings.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics |
| Subtitle of host publication | Human Language Technologies |
| Editors | Luis Chiruzzo, Alan Ritter, Lu Wang |
| Publisher | Association for Computational Linguistics |
| Pages | 7763-7803 |
| Volume | 1 |
| State | Published - Apr 2025 |
| Externally published | Yes |