SurveyGraph: Generating Academic Surveys via Methods-Entity Knowledge Graphs

As scientific literature grows rapidly and research increasingly involves AI agents, automated survey generation has become a key capability for both agents and human researchers. For such agents, a survey serves as a primary knowledge source of a field prior to research. Since pretrained models already encode broad knowledge of established work, these consumers benefit more from analytical depth than from breadth alone; moreover, unsupported claims, once ingested as knowledge, can propagate into downstream research. However, existing systems tend to overemphasize coverage and presentation; they suffer from limited analytical depth due to reliance on abstracts and isolated paper processing, and from unreliable citations due to imprecise retrieval and post-hoc grounding. We present DeepSurvey, an agentic generation system that addresses both limitations. To enhance depth, DeepSurvey extracts structured keynotes, models cross-paper relationships through clustering and comparative analysis, and integrates a code-agent subsystem to recover implementation-level details. To fortify reliability, it combines citation-graph expansion with hybrid filtering for topic-focused retrieval, enforces evidence-constrained analysis and writing, and deploys multi-granularity agentic refinement to validate citation--claim alignment. Experiments show that DeepSurvey achieves the highest content score (8.34/10) and citation quality (recall and precision gains of 25.3% and 35.2% over the strongest baseline), generalizes more robustly across domains, and is preferred by domain experts over human-written surveys (83.3% in overall quality, 100% in content depth). Moreover, when a coding agent uses a survey as its only literature source, the agent equipped with DeepSurvey achieves the best performance among human-written and baseline-generated surveys.

The rapid growth of scientific literature makes survey writing increasingly challenging, motivating automatic survey generation. Yet, existing systems must search an open space of papers and an open space of concepts with no trace of how the community itself has navigated them, leading to incomplete scope, weak taxonomies, and unreliable citations. Our core insight is that author-written Related Work sections contain the human judgments needed to address both limitations: authors curate the citations relevant to their contributions and explain how the cited works relate, yielding paths for scope reconstruction and relational evidence for organization. We propose InsightRAG. Its insight-guided retrieval follows author-supported citation relations to reconstruct a verified research scope and structure the resulting relational evidence. It aggregates these judgments under a minimum-conflict objective into a taxonomy that reflects recurring author-written perspectives in the retrieved literature, guides generation, and bounds each section's evidence. Results on ten topics show gains in scope reconstruction, taxonomy quality, citation support, and reference reliability.

Academic surveys play a central role in organizing rapidly expanding scholarly literature, yet their construction requires extensive paper analysis, coherent knowledge organization, fine-grained citation support, and reliable manuscript assembly. Existing Deep Research and automated survey generation systems address parts of this process, but typically do not coordinate paper understanding, literature organization, evidence-grounded drafting, and manuscript validation through a shared, revisable state. We introduce DAS, a stateful agentic framework for generating publication-oriented academic surveys. Its key idea is to separate reusable paper analysis from topic-specific manuscript construction. DAS builds on DAS-2M, a dynamically updated metadata lake containing survey-oriented representations of approximately two million papers. Its agents maintain explicit literature, organization, writing, and finalization states through candidate-grounded taxonomy planning, reverse paper-to-section routing, and hierarchical claim and citation planning. Semantic review reactivates only the affected writing states for repair and reevaluation, forming a scoped closed loop with deterministic validation. We further introduce DAS-Bench, a 30-topic benchmark, together with DAS-Eval, which assesses scholarly citation quality, taxonomic synthesis, hierarchical discourse, and manuscript assembly reliability through 16 criteria. Among systems evaluated on all 30 topics, DAS achieves the highest average in all four dimensions, with an overall score of 4.34 compared with 4.03 for the strongest competitor, and the same ordering is preserved on the matched 21-topic CS subset. Blinded expert evaluation further prefers DAS to Naive RAG on 27 of 30 topics and to AutoSurvey on 19 of 21 shared CS topics. The project page is available at https://zhikaixu24.github.io/projects/DAS/.