Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces DAS, a stateful agentic framework designed for automating the generation of academic surveys by effectively coordinating paper analysis, literature organization, and manuscript assembly through a shared, revisable state. By leveraging a dynamically updated metadata lake containing representations of approximately two million papers, DAS separates reusable analysis from topic-specific construction, allowing for improved manuscript validation and semantic review processes. The results demonstrate that DAS outperforms existing systems across multiple evaluation criteria, achieving the highest average scores in citation quality, taxonomic synthesis, hierarchical discourse, and manuscript assembly reliability.
DAS achieves a remarkable average score of 4.34 in academic survey automation, surpassing its closest competitor by a significant margin.
Academic surveys play a central role in organizing rapidly expanding scholarly literature, yet their construction requires extensive paper analysis, coherent knowledge organization, fine-grained citation support, and reliable manuscript assembly. Existing Deep Research and automated survey generation systems address parts of this process, but typically do not coordinate paper understanding, literature organization, evidence-grounded drafting, and manuscript validation through a shared, revisable state. We introduce DAS, a stateful agentic framework for generating publication-oriented academic surveys. Its key idea is to separate reusable paper analysis from topic-specific manuscript construction. DAS builds on DAS-2M, a dynamically updated metadata lake containing survey-oriented representations of approximately two million papers. Its agents maintain explicit literature, organization, writing, and finalization states through candidate-grounded taxonomy planning, reverse paper-to-section routing, and hierarchical claim and citation planning. Semantic review reactivates only the affected writing states for repair and reevaluation, forming a scoped closed loop with deterministic validation. We further introduce DAS-Bench, a 30-topic benchmark, together with DAS-Eval, which assesses scholarly citation quality, taxonomic synthesis, hierarchical discourse, and manuscript assembly reliability through 16 criteria. Among systems evaluated on all 30 topics, DAS achieves the highest average in all four dimensions, with an overall score of 4.34 compared with 4.03 for the strongest competitor, and the same ordering is preserved on the matched 21-topic CS subset. Blinded expert evaluation further prefers DAS to Naive RAG on 27 of 30 topics and to AutoSurvey on 19 of 21 shared CS topics. The project page is available at https://zhikaixu24.github.io/projects/DAS/.
