[2606.13044] No Hidden Prompts Needed! You Can Game AI Peer Review with Presentation-Only Revisions

-->

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2606.13044 (cs)

[Submitted on 11 Jun 2026]

Title:No Hidden Prompts Needed! You Can Game AI Peer Review with Presentation-Only Revisions

Authors:Xu Yang, Zhizhou Sha, Junbo Li, Jian Yu, Yifan Sun, Matthew Zhao, Jinrui Fang, Xinyue Guo, Yining Wu, Xu Hu, Yifu Luo, Qiang Liu, Zhangyang Wang<br>View a PDF of the paper titled No Hidden Prompts Needed! You Can Game AI Peer Review with Presentation-Only Revisions, by Xu Yang and 12 other authors

View PDF<br>HTML (experimental)

Abstract:As AI-generated reviews move from experimental tools into peer-review infrastructure, most robustness concerns have focused on explicit attacks such as hidden instructions and prompt injection. We study a harder and more policy-relevant failure mode: no hidden text, no prompt injection, and no changes to methods, experiments, figures, equations, proofs, or numerical results. The attacker modifies only presentation-level content, such as the abstract, contribution framing, related work, discussion, and narrative structure. We introduce adversarial repackaging: a closed-loop attack that uses AI-reviewer feedback to search for presentation-level revisions while keeping the scientific evidence fixed. Across three mainstream AI reviewers, adversarial repackaging achieves a 75.1% attack success rate and a mean score gain of +1.21/10. The effect is not explained by ordinary prose polishing. We also reveal that strategies that change how the reviewer interprets the paper, such as related-work repositioning and analytical discussion expansion, substantially outperform surface edits such as local polishing, table formatting, and algorithm boxes.

Our analysis reveals two deeper structural failure modes. First, AI reviewers are easier to impress than to convince: highlighting strengths reliably increases perceived merit, while attempts to dissolve weaknesses frequently backfire. Second, AI reviewers can confuse the appearance of addressing a limitation with actually resolving it, allowing unchanged evidence to be reinterpreted as stronger scientific contribution. These results show that the deployment risk is not only malicious hidden instructions, but the emergence of paper presentation itself as an optimization surface. We release a contamination-free rolling benchmark and attack framework for testing whether AI reviewers remain anchored to scientific content under presentation-only edits.

Comments:<br>35 pages, 5 figures

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

Cite as:<br>arXiv:2606.13044 [cs.CL]

(or<br>arXiv:2606.13044v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.13044

Focus to learn more

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history<br>From: Xu Yang [view email]<br>[v1]<br>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 08:30:18 UTC (1,536 KB)

Full-text links:<br>Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled No Hidden Prompts Needed! You Can Game AI Peer Review with Presentation-Only Revisions, by Xu Yang and 12 other authors<br>View PDF<br>HTML (experimental)<br>TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

next >

new<br>recent<br>| 2026-06

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS<br>Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

export BibTeX citation<br>Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

&times;

loading...

Data provided by:

Bookmark

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...