arXiv (All)
open access
When Evidence Conflicts: Reliability-aware Meta-review Generation
Generating coherent meta-reviews from multiple peer reviews is challenging when reviewer evidence conflicts and varies in reliability. Existing approaches typically formulate meta-review generation as a multi-document summarization task and aggregate reviewer feedback uniformly, making it difficult
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- LitReview Arena: Evaluating Literature Review Agents with Battle-Style Peer Review Platform#1129367
- Reviewer Agreement and Phrase-Based Profiles#692141
- Citation-Grounded Historical Phrase Profiles for Reviewer Agreement Forecasting#695631
- MultiQC: summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report#6517
- PRISMA-LLM: An Empirical Reporting Framework for AI-Assisted Systematic Reviews#673570
Record · ID 1050214
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive