Can Agents Judge Systematic Reviews Like Humans? Evaluating SLRs with LLM-based Multi-Agent System

Abstract

Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are foundational to evidence-based research but remain labor-intensive and prone to inconsistency across disciplines. We present an LLM-based SLR evaluation copilot built on a Multi-Agent System (MAS) architecture to assist researchers in assessing the overall quality of the systematic literature reviews. The system automates protocol validation, methodological assessment, and topic relevance checks using a scholarly database. Unlike conventional single-agent methods, our design integrates a specialized agentic approach aligned with PRISMA guidelines to support more structured and interpretable evaluations. We conducted an initial study on five published SLRs from diverse domains, comparing system outputs to expert-annotated PRISMA scores, and observed 84% agreement. While early results are promising, this work represents a first step toward scalable and accurate NLP-driven systems for interdisciplinary workflows and reveals their capacity for rigorous, domain-agnostic knowledge aggregation to streamline the review process.