Deep Academic Survey: Stateful Agentic Closed-Loop Paradigm for Academic Survey Automation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18034v1
• Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 17:29:00 GMT
• Title: Deep Academic Survey: Stateful Agentic Closed-Loop Paradigm for Academic Survey Automation
• Abstract summary: DAS is a stateful agentic framework for generating publication-oriented academic surveys.<n>Its key idea is to separate reusable paper analysis from topic-specific manuscript construction.<n>DAS achieves the highest average in all four dimensions, with an overall score of 4.34 compared with 4.03 for the strongest competitor.
• Score: 60.151050016855834
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Academic surveys play a central role in organizing rapidly expanding scholarly literature, yet their construction requires extensive paper analysis, coherent knowledge organization, fine-grained citation support, and reliable manuscript assembly. Existing Deep Research and automated survey generation systems address parts of this process, but typically do not coordinate paper understanding, literature organization, evidence-grounded drafting, and manuscript validation through a shared, revisable state. We introduce DAS, a stateful agentic framework for generating publication-oriented academic surveys. Its key idea is to separate reusable paper analysis from topic-specific manuscript construction. DAS builds on DAS-2M, a dynamically updated metadata lake containing survey-oriented representations of approximately two million papers. Its agents maintain explicit literature, organization, writing, and finalization states through candidate-grounded taxonomy planning, reverse paper-to-section routing, and hierarchical claim and citation planning. Semantic review reactivates only the affected writing states for repair and reevaluation, forming a scoped closed loop with deterministic validation. We further introduce DAS-Bench, a 30-topic benchmark, together with DAS-Eval, which assesses scholarly citation quality, taxonomic synthesis, hierarchical discourse, and manuscript assembly reliability through 16 criteria. Among systems evaluated on all 30 topics, DAS achieves the highest average in all four dimensions, with an overall score of 4.34 compared with 4.03 for the strongest competitor, and the same ordering is preserved on the matched 21-topic CS subset. Blinded expert evaluation further prefers DAS to Naive RAG on 27 of 30 topics and to AutoSurvey on 19 of 21 shared CS topics. The project page is available at https://zhikaixu24.github.io/projects/DAS/.

Related papers

• PaperDoctor: Evidence-Grounded and Actionable Feedback for Scientific Papers in Progress [130.58520199343707]
  PaperDoctor is an agent framework for pre-submission feedback with three key innovations.<n>First, a holistic hierarchical framework evaluates writing, layout, references, code, theory, prior work, and experiments.<n>Second, each finding contains an observation, a pointer to specific evidence such as a sentence, equation, or code line, and a revision suggestion.<n>Third, PaperDoctor selectively rebuilds and reruns experiments based on claim importance and compute budget.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T11:08:11Z)
• Positioning manuscripts in the scientific landscape with agentic AI [21.15576036232353]
  Publishing a research manuscript is a routine yet demanding part of scientific life.<n>Recent advances in large language model (LLM)-based agentic AI have shown promise across a range of scientific tasks.<n>We introduce PASS, an agentic system that understands manuscripts within their domain-specific literature context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-12T07:10:14Z)
• RWGBench: Evaluating Scholarly Positioning in Related Work Generation [43.26813089097539]
  We introduce textbfRWGBench, a benchmark that evaluates RWG from the perspective of citation decision-making rather than text similarity.<n>RWGBench is constructed from a large-scale collection of 40,108 computer science papers and a retrieval corpus of 1.09 million documents.<n>Experiments reveal systematic limitations in current systems that are obscured by standard evaluations, while Oracle studies further disentangle retrieval-level and generation-level bottlenecks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T16:53:14Z)
• AI for Auto-Research: Roadmap & User Guide [107.0834449839233]
  We present an end-to-end analysis of AI across the complete research lifecycle.<n>We identify a sharp, stage-dependent boundary between reliable assistance and unreliable autonomy.<n>We show that greater automation can obscure rather than eliminate failure modes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:08:26Z)
• PaperOrchestra: A Multi-Agent Framework for Automated AI Research Paper Writing [43.290959385976414]
  PaperOrchestra is a multi-agent framework for automated AI research paper writing.<n>It transforms unconstrained preconstrained materials into submission-ready manuscripts.<n>PaperWritingBench is the first standardized benchmark of reverse-engineered raw materials from 200 top-tier AI conference papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-06T18:00:00Z)
• RPC-Bench: A Fine-grained Benchmark for Research Paper Comprehension [65.81339691942757]
  RPC-Bench is a large-scale question-answering benchmark built from review-rebuttal exchanges of high-quality computer science papers.<n>We design a fine-grained taxonomy aligned with the scientific research flow to assess models' ability to understand and answer why, what, and how questions in scholarly contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T11:37:00Z)
• DeepSynth-Eval: Objectively Evaluating Information Consolidation in Deep Survey Writing [53.85037373860246]
  We introduce Deep Synth-Eval, a benchmark designed to objectively evaluate information consolidation capabilities.<n>We propose a fine-grained evaluation protocol using General Checklists (for factual coverage) and Constraint Checklists (for structural organization)<n>Our results demonstrate that agentic plan-and-write significantly outperform single-turn generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T03:07:52Z)
• OpenNovelty: An LLM-powered Agentic System for Verifiable Scholarly Novelty Assessment [63.662126457336534]
  OpenNovelty is an agentic system for transparent, evidence-based novelty analysis.<n>It grounds all assessments in retrieved real papers, ensuring verifiable judgments.<n>OpenNovelty aims to empower the research community with a scalable tool that promotes fair, consistent, and evidence-backed peer review.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-04T15:48:51Z)
• SurGE: A Benchmark and Evaluation Framework for Scientific Survey Generation [37.921524136479825]
  SurGE (Survey Generation Evaluation) is a new benchmark for scientific survey generation in computer science.<n>SurGE consists of (1) a collection of test instances, each including a topic description, an expert-written survey, and its full set of cited references, and (2) a large-scale academic corpus of over one million papers.<n>In addition, we propose an automated evaluation framework that measures the quality of generated surveys across four dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-21T15:45:10Z)
• Let's Use ChatGPT To Write Our Paper! Benchmarking LLMs To Write the Introduction of a Research Paper [64.50822834679101]
  SciIG is a task that evaluates LLMs' ability to produce coherent introductions from titles, abstracts, and related works.<n>We assess five state-of-the-art models, including open-source (DeepSeek-v3, Gemma-3-12B, LLaMA 4-Maverick, MistralAI Small 3.1) and closed-source GPT-4o systems.<n>Results demonstrate LLaMA-4 Maverick's superior performance on most metrics, particularly in semantic similarity and faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T21:11:11Z)
• SciSage: A Multi-Agent Framework for High-Quality Scientific Survey Generation [2.985620880452744]
  SciSage is a multi-agent framework employing a reflect-when-you-write paradigm.<n>It critically evaluates drafts at outline, section, and document levels, collaborating with specialized agents for query interpretation, content retrieval, and refinement.<n>We also release SurveyScope, a benchmark of 46 high-impact papers ( 2020-2025) across 11 computer science domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-15T02:23:47Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.