Skip to content
Log in
Sponsored Have an interesting project or opportunity? → Hire me ↗
Sponsored Design Multi-Agent AI Systems Using MCP and A2A: Engineer your own Pyt Design Multi-Agent AI Systems Using MCP and A2A: Engineer your own Pyt

Author

Aleix Navarro Garrido

View on Semantic Scholar

2 papers indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

#large language models Open access Sep 2026

PeerReviewAgents

PeerReviewAgents is a multi-agent framework for structured manuscript review with large language models. A default run converts a PDF locally, applies an optional desk screen, and sends the manuscript to five specialist reviewers covering scientific validity, quantitative evidence, contribution and prior work, reporting and reproducibility, and ethics. Two parallel auditors check methods completeness and citation support. A meta-reviewer prepares a focused agenda, an advocate and skeptic debate it, and an editor issues an accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject recommendation. A journal scout can optionally suggest publication venues. Each run writes the individual reports, audits, debate, decision letter, usage records, and configuration needed to inspect the process. The framework uses graded Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus routing by default and also supports OpenRouter and OpenAI providers. Optional research tools query scholarly literature sources, while target journal settings and revision rounds support venue-specific and follow-up review. The system is research software for review assistance and evaluation, not a substitute for accountable editorial judgment. Garrett, Navarro Garrido and Garcia-Carbonell contributed equally.

Patrick T. Garrett, Aleix Navarro Garrido, Ricard Garcia‐Carbonell et al. · 0 citations
#large language models Open access Sep 2026

PeerReviewAgents

PeerReviewAgents is a multi-agent framework for structured manuscript review with large language models. A default run converts a PDF locally, applies an optional desk screen, and sends the manuscript to five specialist reviewers covering scientific validity, quantitative evidence, contribution and prior work, reporting and reproducibility, and ethics. Two parallel auditors check methods completeness and citation support. A meta-reviewer prepares a focused agenda, an advocate and skeptic debate it, and an editor issues an accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject recommendation. A journal scout can optionally suggest publication venues. Each run writes the individual reports, audits, debate, decision letter, usage records, and configuration needed to inspect the process. The framework uses graded Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus routing by default and also supports OpenRouter and OpenAI providers. Optional research tools query scholarly literature sources, while target journal settings and revision rounds support venue-specific and follow-up review. The system is research software for review assistance and evaluation, not a substitute for accountable editorial judgment. Garrett, Navarro Garrido and Garcia-Carbonell contributed equally.

Patrick T. Garrett, Aleix Navarro Garrido, Ricard Garcia‐Carbonell et al. · 0 citations