CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 15, 2026

GoodPoint: Learning Constructive Scientific Paper Feedback from Author Responses

arXiv AI Archived Apr 15, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.11924v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While LLMs hold significant potential to transform scientific research, we advocate for their use to augment and empower researchers rather than to automate research without human oversight. To this end, we study constructive feedback generation, the task of producing targeted, actionable feedback that helps authors improve both their research and its presentation. In this work, we operationalize the effectiveness of feedback along two author-centr

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 13 Apr 2026] GoodPoint: Learning Constructive Scientific Paper Feedback from Author Responses Jimin Mun, Chani Jung, Xuhui Zhou, Hyunwoo Kim, Maarten Sap While LLMs hold significant potential to transform scientific research, we advocate for their use to augment and empower researchers rather than to automate research without human oversight. To this end, we study constructive feedback generation, the task of producing targeted, actionable feedback that helps authors improve both their research and its presentation. In this work, we operationalize the effectiveness of feedback along two author-centric axes-validity and author action. We first curate GoodPoint-ICLR, a dataset of 19K ICLR papers with reviewer feedback annotated along both dimensions using author responses. Building on this, we introduce GoodPoint, a training recipe that leverages success signals from author responses through fine-tuning on valid and actionable feedback, together with preference optimization on both real and synthetic preference pairs. Our evaluation on a benchmark of 1.2K ICLR papers shows that a GoodPoint-trained Qwen3-8B improves the predicted success rate by 83.7% over the base model and sets a new state-of-the-art among LLMs of similar size in feedback matching on a golden human feedback set, even surpassing Gemini-3-flash in precision. We further validate these findings through an expert human study, demonstrating that GoodPoint consistently delivers higher practical value as perceived by authors. Comments: 22 pages, 6 figures Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL) Cite as: arXiv:2604.11924 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2604.11924v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.11924 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Jimin Mun [view email] [v1] Mon, 13 Apr 2026 18:12:57 UTC (494 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.CL References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 15, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 15, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗