Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

PeerQA: A Scientific Question Answering Dataset from Peer Reviews

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.13668 v1 pith:BJZ4MSW7 submitted 2025-02-19 cs.CL cs.AIcs.IR

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.IR
keywords peerqadatasetscientificquestionretrievalansweransweringbeen
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We present PeerQA, a real-world, scientific, document-level Question Answering (QA) dataset. PeerQA questions have been sourced from peer reviews, which contain questions that reviewers raised while thoroughly examining the scientific article. Answers have been annotated by the original authors of each paper. The dataset contains 579 QA pairs from 208 academic articles, with a majority from ML and NLP, as well as a subset of other scientific communities like Geoscience and Public Health. PeerQA supports three critical tasks for developing practical QA systems: Evidence retrieval, unanswerable question classification, and answer generation. We provide a detailed analysis of the collected dataset and conduct experiments establishing baseline systems for all three tasks. Our experiments and analyses reveal the need for decontextualization in document-level retrieval, where we find that even simple decontextualization approaches consistently improve retrieval performance across architectures. On answer generation, PeerQA serves as a challenging benchmark for long-context modeling, as the papers have an average size of 12k tokens. Our code and data is available at https://github.com/UKPLab/peerqa.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. MMEB-V3: Measuring the Performance Gaps of Omni-Modality Embedding Models

    cs.IR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    On 190 tasks and a 12-direction cross-modal diagnostic, seven embedding models frequently fail to honor explicit target-modality instructions: retrieval is biased toward the query modality and instruction-induced shif...

  2. Beyond Memory Leaderboards: Evaluating Scientific Memory as Budgeted Context Restoration

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Scientific-memory leaderboards are misleading unless retrieval budget and modality are reported; under matched budgets, simple RAG baselines tie with structured memory systems.

  3. How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    This survey proposes a four-level capability framework for AI Scientist systems and, using an AI reviewer, finds that current systems produce papers rated well below normal scientific standards.

Pith tools