The rapid expansion of scholarly literature presents significant challenges in synthesizing comprehensive, high-quality academic surveys. Recent advancements in agentic systems offer considerable promise for automating tasks that traditionally require human expertise, including literature review, synthesis, and iterative refinement. However, existing automated survey-generation solutions often suffer from inadequate quality control, poor formatting, and limited adaptability to iterative feedback, which are core elements intrinsic to scholarly writing. To address these limitations, we introduce ARISE, an Agentic Rubric-guided Iterative Survey Engine designed for automated generation and continuous refinement of academic survey papers. ARISE employs a modular architecture composed of specialized large language model agents, each mirroring distinct scholarly roles such as topic expansion, citation curation, literature summarization, manuscript drafting, and peer-review-based evaluation. Central to ARISE is a rubric-guided iterative refinement loop in which multiple reviewer agents independently assess manuscript drafts using a structured, behaviorally anchored rubric, systematically enhancing the content through synthesized feedback. Evaluating ARISE against state-of-the-art automated systems and recent human-written surveys, our experimental results demonstrate superior performance, achieving an average rubric-aligned quality score of 92.48. ARISE consistently surpasses baseline methods across metrics of comprehensiveness, accuracy, formatting, and overall scholarly rigor. All code, evaluation rubrics, and generated outputs are provided openly at https://github.com/ziwang11112/ARISE

Survey papers are foundational to the scholarly progress of research communities, offering structured overviews that guide both novices and experts across disciplines. However, the recent surge of AI-generated surveys, especially enabled by large language models (LLMs), has transformed this traditionally labor-intensive genre into a low-effort, high-volume output. While such automation lowers entry barriers, it also introduces a critical threat: the phenomenon we term the "survey paper DDoS attack" to the research community. This refers to the unchecked proliferation of superficially comprehensive but often redundant, low-quality, or even hallucinated survey manuscripts, which floods preprint platforms, overwhelms researchers, and erodes trust in the scientific record. In this position paper, we argue that we must stop uploading massive amounts of AI-generated survey papers (i.e., survey paper DDoS attack) to the research community, by instituting strong norms for AI-assisted review writing. We call for restoring expert oversight and transparency in AI usage and, moreover, developing new infrastructures such as Dynamic Live Surveys, community-maintained, version-controlled repositories that blend automated updates with human curation. Through quantitative trend analysis, quality audits, and cultural impact discussion, we show that safeguarding the integrity of surveys is no longer optional but imperative to the research community.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted for automating survey paper generation \cite{wang2406autosurvey, liang2025surveyx, yan2025surveyforge,su2025benchmarking,wen2025interactivesurvey}. Existing approaches typically extract content from a large collection of related papers and prompt LLMs to summarize them directly. However, such methods often overlook the structural relationships among papers, resulting in generated surveys that lack a coherent taxonomy and a deeper contextual understanding of research progress. To address these shortcomings, we propose \textbf{SurveyG}, an LLM-based agent framework that integrates \textit{hierarchical citation graph}, where nodes denote research papers and edges capture both citation dependencies and semantic relatedness between their contents, thereby embedding structural and contextual knowledge into the survey generation process. The graph is organized into three layers: \textbf{Foundation}, \textbf{Development}, and \textbf{Frontier}, to capture the evolution of research from seminal works to incremental advances and emerging directions. By combining horizontal search within layers and vertical depth traversal across layers, the agent produces multi-level summaries, which are consolidated into a structured survey outline. A multi-agent validation stage then ensures consistency, coverage, and factual accuracy in generating the final survey. Experiments, including evaluations by human experts and LLM-as-a-judge, demonstrate that SurveyG outperforms state-of-the-art frameworks, producing surveys that are more comprehensive and better structured to the underlying knowledge taxonomy of a field.

The advent of Deep Research agents has substantially reduced the time required for conducting extensive research tasks. However, these tasks inherently demand rigorous standards of factual accuracy and comprehensiveness, necessitating thorough evaluation before widespread adoption. In this paper, we propose ReportBench, a systematic benchmark designed to evaluate the content quality of research reports generated by large language models (LLMs). Our evaluation focuses on two critical dimensions: (1) the quality and relevance of cited literature, and (2) the faithfulness and veracity of the statements within the generated reports. ReportBench leverages high-quality published survey papers available on arXiv as gold-standard references, from which we apply reverse prompt engineering to derive domain-specific prompts and establish a comprehensive evaluation corpus. Furthermore, we develop an agent-based automated framework within ReportBench that systematically analyzes generated reports by extracting citations and statements, checking the faithfulness of cited content against original sources, and validating non-cited claims using web-based resources. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that commercial Deep Research agents such as those developed by OpenAI and Google consistently generate more comprehensive and reliable reports than standalone LLMs augmented with search or browsing tools. However, there remains substantial room for improvement in terms of the breadth and depth of research coverage, as well as factual consistency. The complete code and data will be released at the following link: https://github.com/ByteDance-BandAI/ReportBench

The growing interest in automatic survey generation (ASG), a task that traditionally required considerable time and effort, has been spurred by recent advances in large language models (LLMs). With advancements in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and the rising popularity of multi-agent systems (MASs), synthesizing academic surveys using LLMs has become a viable approach, thereby elevating the need for robust evaluation methods in this domain. However, existing evaluation methods suffer from several limitations, including biased metrics, a lack of human preference, and an over-reliance on LLMs-as-judges. To address these challenges, we propose SGSimEval, a comprehensive benchmark for Survey Generation with Similarity-Enhanced Evaluation that evaluates automatic survey generation systems by integrating assessments of the outline, content, and references, and also combines LLM-based scoring with quantitative metrics to provide a multifaceted evaluation framework. In SGSimEval, we also introduce human preference metrics that emphasize both inherent quality and similarity to humans. Extensive experiments reveal that current ASG systems demonstrate human-comparable superiority in outline generation, while showing significant room for improvement in content and reference generation, and our evaluation metrics maintain strong consistency with human assessments.

The exponential growth of academic literature creates urgent demands for comprehensive survey papers, yet manual writing remains time-consuming and labor-intensive. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) facilitate studies in synthesizing survey papers from multiple references, but most existing works restrict users to title-only inputs and fixed outputs, neglecting the personalized process of survey paper writing. In this paper, we introduce InteractiveSurvey - an LLM-based personalized and interactive survey paper generation system. InteractiveSurvey can generate structured, multi-modal survey papers with reference categorizations from multiple reference papers through both online retrieval and user uploads. More importantly, users can customize and refine intermediate components continuously during generation, including reference categorization, outline, and survey content through an intuitive interface. Evaluations of content quality, time efficiency, and user studies show that InteractiveSurvey is an easy-to-use survey generation system that outperforms most LLMs and existing methods in output content quality while remaining highly time-efficient.

Survey paper plays a crucial role in scientific research, especially given the rapid growth of research publications. Recently, researchers have begun using LLMs to automate survey generation for better efficiency. However, the quality gap between LLM-generated surveys and those written by human remains significant, particularly in terms of outline quality and citation accuracy. To close these gaps, we introduce SurveyForge, which first generates the outline by analyzing the logical structure of human-written outlines and referring to the retrieved domain-related articles. Subsequently, leveraging high-quality papers retrieved from memory by our scholar navigation agent, SurveyForge can automatically generate and refine the content of the generated article. Moreover, to achieve a comprehensive evaluation, we construct SurveyBench, which includes 100 human-written survey papers for win-rate comparison and assesses AI-generated survey papers across three dimensions: reference, outline, and content quality. Experiments demonstrate that SurveyForge can outperform previous works such as AutoSurvey.

Familiarizing oneself with a new scientific field and its existing literature can be daunting due to the large amount of available articles. Curated lists of academic references, or reading lists, compiled by experts, offer a structured way to gain a comprehensive overview of a domain or a specific scientific challenge. In this work, we introduce ACL-rlg, the largest open expert-annotated reading list dataset. We also provide multiple baselines for evaluating reading list generation and formally define it as a retrieval task. Our qualitative study highlights the fact that traditional scholarly search engines and indexing methods perform poorly on this task, and GPT-4o, despite showing better results, exhibits signs of potential data contamination.

Abstract. Automatically generating scientific literature surveys is a valuable task that can significantly enhance research efficiency. However, the diverse and complex nature of information within a literature survey poses substantial challenges for generative models. In this paper, we design a series of prompts to systematically leverage large language models (LLMs), enabling the creation of comprehensive literature surveys through a step-by-step approach. Specifically, we design prompts to guide LLMs to sequentially generate the title, abstract, hierarchical headings, and the main content of the literature survey. We argue that this design enables the generation of the headings from a high-level perspective. During the content generation process, this design effectively harnesses relevant information while minimizing costs by restricting the length of both input and output content in LLM queries. Our implementation with Qwen-long achieved third place in the NLPCC 2024 Scientific Literature Survey Generation evaluation task, with an overall score only 0.03% lower than the second-place team. Additionally, our soft heading recall is 95.84%, the second best among the submissions. Thanks to the efficient prompt design and the low cost of the Qwen-long API, our method reduces the expense for generating each literature survey to 0.1 RMB, enhancing the practical value of our method.

With the exponential growth in the number of papers and the trend of AI research, the use of Generative AI for information retrieval and question-answering has become popular for conducting research surveys. However, novice researchers unfamiliar with a particular field may not significantly improve their efficiency in interacting with Generative AI because they have not developed divergent thinking in that field. This study aims to develop an in-depth Survey Forest Diagram that guides novice researchers in divergent thinking about the research topic by indicating the citation clues among multiple papers, to help expand the survey perspective for novice researchers.