What Happens When Reviewers Receive AI Feedback in Their Reviews?
Shiping Chen, Shu Zhong, Duncan P. Brumby, Anna L. Cox
Abstract
AI is reshaping academic research, yet its role in peer review remains polarising and contentious. Advocates see its potential to reduce reviewer burden and improve quality, while critics warn of risks to fairness, accountability, and trust. At ICLR 2025, an official AI feedback tool was deployed to provide reviewers with post-review suggestions. We studied this deployment through surveys and interviews, investigating how reviewers engaged with the tool and perceived its usability and impact. Our findings surface both opportunities and tensions when AI augments in peer review. This work contributes the first empirical evidence of such an AI tool in a live review process, documenting how reviewers respond to AI-generated feedback in a high-stakes review context. We further offer design implications for AI-assisted reviewing that aim to enhance quality while safeguarding human expertise, agency, and responsibility.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 68596777-978b-41ce-a4c7-18f8ddce33a2Builds on28
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating ModelsShraddha Barke, Michael B. James, Nadia PolikarpovaOOPSLA 2023 · 408 citations
- CoAuthor: Designing a Human-AI Collaborative Writing Dataset for Exploring Language Model CapabilitiesMina Lee, Percy Liang, Qian YangCHI 2022 · 340 citations
- Co-Writing with Opinionated Language Models Affects Users' ViewsMaurice Jakesch, Advait Bhat, Daniel Buschek, Lior Zalmanson et al.CHI 2023 · 249 citations
- A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing AssistantsMina Lee, Katy Ilonka Gero, John Joon Young Chung, Simon Buckingham Shum et al.CHI 2024 · 133 citations
Related papers
- The AI Review Lottery: Widespread AI-Assisted Peer Reviews Boost Paper Scores and Acceptance RatesGiuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Tim R. Davidson, Veniamin Veselovsky et al.CSCW 2025 · 10 citations
- MetaWriter: Exploring the Potential and Perils of AI Writing Support in Scientific Peer ReviewLu Sun, Stone Tao, Junjie Hu, Steven P. DowCSCW 2024 · 36 citations
- Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not EnforceableRounak Saha, Gurusha Juneja, Dayita Chaudhuri, Naveeja Sajeevan et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- Reporting and Reviewing LLM-Integrated Systems in HCI: Challenges and ConsiderationsKarla Felix Navarro, Eugene Syriani, Ian ArawjoCHI 2026 · 1 citation
- Paper Copilot: Tracking the Evolution of Peer Review in AI ConferencesJing Yang, Qiyao Wei, Jiaxin PeiICLR 2026 · 12 citations
