Reviews sometimes differ in their use of the simple present or the preterit to describe the contents of the papers. Language experts usually recommend using the present for description, which seems to be enforced by most contributors.
The past could be used in specific contexts, IMHO. For example, when referring to previous works from the authors of which you describe the work.
AuthorName et al. propose something. It follows another work in which they demonstrated something else.
Reviews sometimes differ in their use of the simple present or the preterit to describe the contents of the papers. Language experts usually recommend using the present for description, which seems to be enforced by most contributors.
The past could be used in specific contexts, IMHO. For example, when referring to previous works from the authors of which you describe the work.