Allocate Marginal Reviews to Borderline Papers Using LLM Comparative Ranking

Fuente: arXiv
Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Epstein, Elliot L., Dwaraknath, Rajat, Winnicki, John, Sornwanee, Thanawat
Format: Preprint
Publié: 2026
Sujets:
Accès en ligne:
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
_version_ 1866917252120444928
author Epstein, Elliot L.
Dwaraknath, Rajat
Winnicki, John
Sornwanee, Thanawat
author_facet Epstein, Elliot L.
Dwaraknath, Rajat
Winnicki, John
Sornwanee, Thanawat
contents This paper argues that large ML conferences should allocate marginal review capacity primarily to papers near the acceptance boundary, rather than spreading extra reviews via random or affinity-driven heuristics. We propose using LLM-based comparative ranking (via pairwise comparisons and a Bradley--Terry model) to identify a borderline band \emph{before} human reviewing and to allocate \emph{marginal} reviewer capacity at assignment time. Concretely, given a venue-specific minimum review target (e.g., 3 or 4), we use this signal to decide which papers receive one additional review (e.g., a 4th or 5th), without conditioning on any human reviews and without using LLM outputs for accept/reject. We provide a simple expected-impact calculation in terms of (i) the overlap between the predicted and true borderline sets ($ρ$) and (ii) the incremental value of an extra review near the boundary ($Δ$), and we provide retrospective proxies to estimate these quantities.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_06078
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Allocate Marginal Reviews to Borderline Papers Using LLM Comparative Ranking
Epstein, Elliot L.
Dwaraknath, Rajat
Winnicki, John
Sornwanee, Thanawat
Digital Libraries
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
I.2.7
This paper argues that large ML conferences should allocate marginal review capacity primarily to papers near the acceptance boundary, rather than spreading extra reviews via random or affinity-driven heuristics. We propose using LLM-based comparative ranking (via pairwise comparisons and a Bradley--Terry model) to identify a borderline band \emph{before} human reviewing and to allocate \emph{marginal} reviewer capacity at assignment time. Concretely, given a venue-specific minimum review target (e.g., 3 or 4), we use this signal to decide which papers receive one additional review (e.g., a 4th or 5th), without conditioning on any human reviews and without using LLM outputs for accept/reject. We provide a simple expected-impact calculation in terms of (i) the overlap between the predicted and true borderline sets ($ρ$) and (ii) the incremental value of an extra review near the boundary ($Δ$), and we provide retrospective proxies to estimate these quantities.
title Allocate Marginal Reviews to Borderline Papers Using LLM Comparative Ranking
topic Digital Libraries
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
I.2.7
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.06078