ScholarEval: Research Idea Evaluation Grounded in Literature

Reading time: 2 minute
...

📝 Original Info

  • Title: ScholarEval: Research Idea Evaluation Grounded in Literature
  • ArXiv ID: 2510.16234
  • Date: 2025-10-17
  • Authors: 논문에 명시된 저자 정보가 제공되지 않았습니다.

📝 Abstract

As AI tools become increasingly common for research ideation, robust evaluation is critical to ensure the validity and usefulness of generated ideas. We introduce ScholarEval, a retrieval augmented evaluation framework that assesses research ideas based on two fundamental criteria: soundness - the empirical validity of proposed methods based on existing literature, and contribution - the degree of advancement made by the idea across different dimensions relative to prior research. To evaluate ScholarEval, we introduce ScholarIdeas, the first expert-annotated dataset of multi-domain research ideas and reviews, comprised of 117 ideas across four disciplines: artificial intelligence, neuroscience, biochemistry, and ecology. Our evaluation shows that ScholarEval achieves significantly higher coverage of points mentioned in the human expert annotated rubrics in ScholarIdeas compared to all baselines. Furthermore, ScholarEval is consistently preferred over our strongest baseline o4-mini-deep-research, a reasoning and search-enabled agentic system by OpenAI, in terms of evaluation actionability, depth, and evidence support. Our large-scale user study also shows that ScholarEval significantly outperforms deep research in literature engagement, idea refinement, and usefulness. We openly release our code, dataset, and ScholarEval tool for the community to use and build on.

💡 Deep Analysis

Figure 1

📄 Full Content

📸 Image Gallery

highlight_image.png logo.png pairwise_preference_image.png scholar_ideas_image.png ui_image.png user_study_ui2_image.png user_study_ui_image.png

Reference

This content is AI-processed based on open access ArXiv data.

Start searching

Enter keywords to search articles

↑↓
ESC
⌘K Shortcut