Track synthesis, materials and catalysis as it is published.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces InternReviewer and InternAdvocate, specialized agents designed for generating peer reviews and rebuttals through a novel agentic Reinforcement Learning (RL) framework. By leveraging a high-quality scholarly dataset and an efficient arXiv retrieval tool, the authors establish a unified objective metric and reward system that minimizes biases associated with subjective evaluations. Experimental results indicate that these agents significantly enhance reasoning depth and citation accuracy, marking a substantial advancement in the automation of scholarly content generation.
Agents trained in this framework achieve unprecedented improvements in reasoning depth and citation accuracy, transforming the landscape of automated peer review processes.
Generating professional scholarly content, such as peer reviews and rebuttals, requires an intricate synergy between domain reasoning and factual grounding. This work presents a comprehensive framework for the development and evaluation of specialized scholarly agents, InternReviewer and InternAdvocate. We first establish a large-scale, high-quality scholarly dataset and integrate a high-efficiency arXiv retrieval tool to enable active evidence gathering. To optimize these agents, we implement an agentic Reinforcement Learning (RL) paradigm driven by a unified objective metric and reward system. This system avoids the biases of subjective model-based judging by employing multi-dimensional criteria, including reference-anchored semantic alignment, structural compliance, and a strict verification mechanism that cross-checks citations against real-time interaction logs to eliminate hallucinations. Experimental results demonstrate that agents trained within this closed-loop framework exhibit significant improvements in reasoning depth and citation accuracy.
Tsinghua AI