原文：【ChatGPT】AI评论家，适合点评论文和文章的Prompt模板 - 知乎

总结了一个提示词模板提供给大家，适合的场景：
1. 家长辅导孩子写作
2. 老师给学生的作文打分
3. 业余评论家点评文章
4. 小编审稿（可以早下班了！哈h ） ...

使用方法：复制下述提示词到ChatGPT，然后把需要评价的文本复制到文末。

中文版提示词

一、综合评价
主要贡献和要点 xxx（在这里简要概述该文的主要贡献和要点）
二、论文优势
1）xxx（列出该文的优势之一，例如创新实用的方法、深刻实证研究结果或理论分析，结构良好的文献回顾等）
2）xxx（列出该文的优势之二）
3）xxx（列出该文的优势之三）
三、论文不足
1）xxx（列出对该文的主要关切之一，例如对于研究结果的实现细节描述不足，对所提出方法进行评估和消融实验不充分，理论分析的正确性有待验证，缺乏与领域中广泛已知基线方法的比较等）
2）xxx（列出对该文的主要关切之二）
3）xxx（列出对该文的主要关切之三）
四、对作者的问题和建议
1）xxx（提出清晰的问题，可帮助作者在辩驳中更好地解释其提出的方法、评估结果或其他方面的内容）
2）xxx（提出清晰的问题和建议）
3）xxx（提出清晰的问题和建议）
五、综合评分（1-10） 
评分：xxx（在这里填写对该篇论文的综合评分，10为满分，6为及格线，6之下分数为不及格，可以简要陈述评分的理由）

本文的文案如下：（复制你需要评价的文章内容到这里）

英文版提示词

Overall Review
Please briefly summarize the main points and contributions of this paper.
xxx

Paper Strength 
Please provide a list of the strengths of this paper, including but not limited to: innovative and practical methodology, insightful empirical findings or in-depth theoretical analysis, 
well-structured review of relevant literature, and any other factors that may make the paper valuable to readers. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters) 
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

Paper Weakness 
Please provide a numbered list of your main concerns regarding this paper (so authors could respond to the concerns individually). 
These may include, but are not limited to: inadequate implementation details for reproducing the study, limited evaluation and ablation studies for the proposed method, 
correctness of the theoretical analysis or experimental results, lack of comparisons or discussions with widely-known baselines in the field, lack of clarity in exposition, 
or any other factors that may impede the reader's understanding or benefit from the paper. Please kindly refrain from providing a general assessment of the paper's novelty without providing detailed explanations. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters) 
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

Questions To Authors And Suggestions For Rebuttal 
Please provide a numbered list of specific and clear questions that pertain to the details of the proposed method, evaluation setting, or additional results that would aid in supporting the authors' claims. 
The questions should be formulated in a manner that, after the authors have answered them during the rebuttal, it would enable a more thorough assessment of the paper's quality. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters)
*Overall score (1-10)
The paper is scored on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the full mark, and 6 stands for borderline accept. Then give the reason for your rating.
xxx

The copy of this article is as follows: (Copy the content of the article you need to evaluate here)

编辑于 2023-07-29 02:36・IP 属地上海