We examine selected aspects of peer review and suggest possible improvements. To this end, we analyse a dataset containing information about 300 papers submitted to the Biochemistry and Biotechnology section of the Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society. After separating the peer review process into stages that each review has to go through, we use a weighted directed graph to describe it in a probabilistic manner and test the impact of some modifications of the editorial policy on the efficiency of the whole process.
@article{arxiv.1508.01134,
title = {Review times in peer review: quantitative analysis of editorial workflows},
author = {Maciej J. Mrowinski and Agata Fronczak and Piotr Fronczak and Olgica Nedic and Marcel Ausloos},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.01134},
year = {2016}
}