To Consolidate or not to Consolidate? Evaluating the Impact of Consolidation in Multi-Reference Training using Peer Reviews
cs.CL
Submitted: 2026-09-19
Updated: 2026-09-19
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Natural language generation (NLG) tasks span the spectrum of conditional entropy, ranging from highly constrained machine translation to open-ended dialogue generation.
Terminology
Abstract
Natural language generation (NLG) tasks span the spectrum of conditional entropy, ranging from highly constrained machine translation to open-ended dialogue generation. Structured tasks like automated peer-review generation occupy the intermediate region, where a single input admits multiple valid, overlapping outputs. In this work, we demonstrate that traditional single- and multi-reference training paradigms are suboptimal for these intermediary tasks. We provide empirical evidence that consolidating diverse references into a unified training signal is crucial for developing effective systems. To facilitate this, we introduce MERC-36K, a large-scale corpus of over 36,000 papers paired with original and consolidated peer reviews. Using this dataset, we train specific architectures to isolate the impact of different reference paradigms and benchmark against existing state-of-the-art systems. Through extensive automatic and human evaluation, we demonstrate that models trained on consolidated references significantly outperform those trained on unconsolidated references. Dataset and code will be released upon acceptance.
Related papers
- Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving
- Ishigaki-IDS-Bench: A Benchmark for Generating Information Delivery Specification from BIM Information Requirements
- Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signals
- MedStruct-S: A Benchmark for Key Discovery, Key-Conditioned QA and Semi-Structured Extraction from OCR Clinical Reports
- The End of Transformers? On Challenging Attention and the Rise of Sub-Quadratic Architectures
- Untangling the Mechanisms of Misleading Context in Medical Question Answering