Hugging Face Daily Papers · · 4 min read

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

Mirrored from Hugging Face Daily Papers for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

🚀 Excited to share ActReview!<br>We ask: Can LLM-generated peer reviews not only identify weaknesses, but also help authors revise their papers?<br>Our key insight is that reviewer comments reveal what is wrong, while author rebuttals often reveal how the concern can be addressed. We use this signal to build ActReview-40K, aligning reviewer weaknesses with rebuttal responses and localized paper evidence.<br>We train ActReview with multi-task SFT followed by GRPO using weakness-specific rubric rewards, and introduce ActReview-Bench, a human-curated benchmark of 1,000 examples.<br>ActReview produces feedback that is more actionable and grounded than prior specialized review-generation models.</p>\n","updatedAt":"2026-09-11T15:21:12.408Z","author":{"_id":"69227307168e7fa5935fc7a6","avatarUrl":"/avatars/20f959a3314ce098fcd224ae999e2a8f.svg","fullname":"YilingMa","name":"YilingMa","type":"user","isPro":false,"isHf":false,"isHfAdmin":false,"isMod":false,"isUserFollowing":false}},"numEdits":0,"identifiedLanguage":{"language":"en","probability":0.9322383403778076},"editors":["YilingMa"],"editorAvatarUrls":["/avatars/20f959a3314ce098fcd224ae999e2a8f.svg"],"reactions":[],"isReport":false}}],"primaryEmailConfirmed":false,"paper":{"id":"2609.09076","authors":[{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf0","name":"Yiling Ma","hidden":false},{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf1","name":"Yilun Zhao","hidden":false},{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf2","name":"Sihong Wu","hidden":false},{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf3","name":"Ziyu Chen","hidden":false},{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf4","name":"Manasi Patwardhan","hidden":false},{"_id":"6aa1453bff4bf7311191aaf5","name":"Arman Cohan","hidden":false}],"publishedAt":"2026-09-08T00:00:00.000Z","submittedOnDailyAt":"2026-09-11T00:00:00.000Z","title":"ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation","submittedOnDailyBy":{"_id":"69227307168e7fa5935fc7a6","avatarUrl":"/avatars/20f959a3314ce098fcd224ae999e2a8f.svg","isPro":false,"fullname":"YilingMa","user":"YilingMa","type":"user","name":"YilingMa"},"summary":"As LLMs are increasingly used for pre-submission self-review, there is growing demand for feedback that not only identifies weaknesses but also guides authors toward concrete revisions. We study this as Actionable Peer-review Generation and decompose it into two subtasks: diagnostic claim generation and revision suggestion generation. We introduce ActReview, a rebuttal-guided post-training framework that connects paper-specific diagnoses to concrete, grounded revision plans. Our central insight is that author rebuttals reveal plausible actions for addressing reviewer concerns and can therefore provide latent supervision for revision-oriented feedback. From real review-rebuttal threads on OpenReview, we construct ActReview-40K by aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses and grounding the resulting feedback in localized paper evidence. We post-train Qwen3-8B-Base with multi-task supervised fine-tuning followed by GRPO using candidate-aware, weakness-specific rubric rewards. We also introduce ActReview-Bench, a human-curated benchmark of 1,000 instances for evaluating diagnostic quality and revision usefulness. Experiments show that ActReview outperforms prior specialized review-generation models on actionability and grounding while remaining competitive with strong prompt-based LLMs. Human evaluation confirms improved revision usefulness while revealing a remaining gap in technical accuracy, and additional analyses support generalization to held-out papers and robustness across independent judges.","upvotes":0,"discussionId":"6aa1453cff4bf7311191aaf6","githubRepo":"https://github.com/Yiling-Ma/ActReview","githubRepoAddedBy":"user","ai_summary":"ActReview is a rebuttal-guided post-training framework that generates diagnostic claims and concrete revision suggestions for peer review by leveraging author responses as latent supervision.","ai_keywords":["Actionable Peer-review Generation","diagnostic claim generation","revision suggestion generation","ActReview","rebuttal-guided post-training","multi-task supervised fine-tuning","GRPO","candidate-aware rubric rewards","ActReview-40K","ActReview-Bench"],"ai_summary_model":"thinkingmachines/Inkling-Small","githubStars":0,"organization":{"_id":"6532df27d690f3012efde84c","name":"yale-nlp","fullname":"Yale NLP Lab","avatar":"https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/65204db5b0e0d57453cb1809/9OAeiZ-BrN2g1h1yd6-1W.png"}},"canReadDatabase":false,"canManagePapers":false,"canSubmit":false,"hasHfLevelAccess":false,"upvoted":false,"upvoters":[],"acceptLanguages":["en"],"organization":{"_id":"6532df27d690f3012efde84c","name":"yale-nlp","fullname":"Yale NLP Lab","avatar":"https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/65204db5b0e0d57453cb1809/9OAeiZ-BrN2g1h1yd6-1W.png"},"markdownContentUrl":"https://huggingface.co/buckets/huggingchat/papers-content/resolve/2609/2609.09076.md","query":{}}">
Papers
arxiv:2609.09076

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

Published on Sep 8
· Submitted by
YilingMa
on Sep 11
Authors:
,

Abstract

ActReview is a rebuttal-guided post-training framework that generates diagnostic claims and concrete revision suggestions for peer review by leveraging author responses as latent supervision.

As LLMs are increasingly used for pre-submission self-review, there is growing demand for feedback that not only identifies weaknesses but also guides authors toward concrete revisions. We study this as Actionable Peer-review Generation and decompose it into two subtasks: diagnostic claim generation and revision suggestion generation. We introduce ActReview, a rebuttal-guided post-training framework that connects paper-specific diagnoses to concrete, grounded revision plans. Our central insight is that author rebuttals reveal plausible actions for addressing reviewer concerns and can therefore provide latent supervision for revision-oriented feedback. From real review-rebuttal threads on OpenReview, we construct ActReview-40K by aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses and grounding the resulting feedback in localized paper evidence. We post-train Qwen3-8B-Base with multi-task supervised fine-tuning followed by GRPO using candidate-aware, weakness-specific rubric rewards. We also introduce ActReview-Bench, a human-curated benchmark of 1,000 instances for evaluating diagnostic quality and revision usefulness. Experiments show that ActReview outperforms prior specialized review-generation models on actionability and grounding while remaining competitive with strong prompt-based LLMs. Human evaluation confirms improved revision usefulness while revealing a remaining gap in technical accuracy, and additional analyses support generalization to held-out papers and robustness across independent judges.

Community

Paper submitter about 5 hours ago

🚀 Excited to share ActReview!
We ask: Can LLM-generated peer reviews not only identify weaknesses, but also help authors revise their papers?
Our key insight is that reviewer comments reveal what is wrong, while author rebuttals often reveal how the concern can be addressed. We use this signal to build ActReview-40K, aligning reviewer weaknesses with rebuttal responses and localized paper evidence.
We train ActReview with multi-task SFT followed by GRPO using weakness-specific rubric rewards, and introduce ActReview-Bench, a human-curated benchmark of 1,000 examples.
ActReview produces feedback that is more actionable and grounded than prior specialized review-generation models.

Upload images, audio, and videos by dragging in the text input, pasting, or clicking here.
Tap or paste here to upload images

· Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2609.09076
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.09076 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.09076 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.09076 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from Hugging Face Daily Papers