Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

SAGE: Schema-Guided LLMs for Grant Review

Summary

arXiv:2609.20829v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grant reviewers must apply detailed criteria to application forms, budgets, and supporting documents while producing assessments that colleagues can inspect. We present SAGE, Schema-Guided Aspect-Based Grant Evaluation, a system that translates a grant rubric into structured checks and links its judgements to evidence from the application package. We evaluate SAGE in two stages on 35 nonprofit grant applications. A post-factum comparison with 105 reviews from the original competition shows fair ordinal agreement (kappa = 0.29). The foundation then conducted a criterion-level re-review after inspecting SAGE, producing 202 assessments. In this assisted round, SAGE reached kappa = 0.58 and outperformed a one-prompt-per-criterion baseline (kappa…

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Erik Varapaev, Andrei Chetvergov, Stepan Ukolov, Timofei Sivoraksha, Alexander Evseev, Sergey Bolovtsov
SAGE: Schema-Guided LLMs for Grant Review
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 22 Jul 2026]

Title:SAGE: Schema-Guided LLMs for Grant Review

View a PDF of the paper titled SAGE: Schema-Guided LLMs for Grant Review, by Erik Varapaev and 5 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Grant reviewers must apply detailed criteria to application forms, budgets, and supporting documents while producing assessments that colleagues can inspect. We present SAGE, Schema-Guided Aspect-Based Grant Evaluation, a system that translates a grant rubric into structured checks and links its judgements to evidence from the application package. We evaluate SAGE in two stages on 35 nonprofit grant applications. A post-factum comparison with 105 reviews from the original competition shows fair ordinal agreement (kappa = 0.29). The foundation then conducted a criterion-level re-review after inspecting SAGE, producing 202 assessments. In this assisted round, SAGE reached kappa = 0.58 and outperformed a one-prompt-per-criterion baseline (kappa = 0.33 on the common subset), with higher rank correlation and lower error. A claim-level audit further identifies confirmed, disputed, and unaddressed parts of the structured draft. SAGE operationalizes the review methodology by producing a detailed, evidence-linked, and auditable draft for expert correction.

Comments: 14 pages, 2 figures, 10 tables

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

ACM classes: I.2.7; I.2.6

Cite as: arXiv:2609.20829 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.20829v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.20829

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Andrey Chetvergov [view email] [v1] Wed, 22 Jul 2026 17:55:56 UTC (2,434 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled SAGE: Schema-Guided LLMs for Grant Review, by Erik Varapaev and 5 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.20829v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grant reviewers must apply detailed criteria to application forms, budgets, and supporting documents while producing assessments th…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.