Related papers: Accelerating the pace of discovery by changing the…
The rapid development of science and technology has been accompanied by an exponential growth in peer-reviewed scientific publications. At the same time, the review of each paper is a laborious process that must be carried out by subject…
We are witnessing a rapid trend towards the adoption of exercises for evaluation of national research systems, generally based on the peer review approach. They respond to two main needs: stimulating higher efficiency in research activities…
Despite the tremendous successes of science in providing knowledge and technologies, the Replication Crisis has highlighted that scientific institutions have much room for improvement. Peer-review is one target of criticism and suggested…
The purpose of this paper is to introduce a model for measuring the efficiency in managing peer-review of scientific manuscripts by editors. The approach employed is based on the assumption that the editorial aim is to manage publication…
It is ever more common in scientific publishing to ask authors to suggest some reviewers for their own manuscripts. The question then arises: How many submissions does it take to discover friendly suggested reviewers? To answer this…
Peer review in academic research aims not only to ensure factual correctness but also to identify work of high scientific potential that can shape future research directions. This task is especially critical in fast-moving fields such as…
Scientific discoveries must be communicated clearly to realize their full potential. Without effective communication, even the most groundbreaking findings risk being overlooked or misunderstood. The primary way scientists communicate their…
Scholarly peer review is a cornerstone of scientific advancement, but the system is under strain due to increasing manuscript submissions and the labor-intensive nature of the process. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs)…
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has begun to reshape academic publishing by enabling the rapid production of submission-ready manuscripts. While such tools promise to enhance productivity, they also raise concerns about overwhelming…
Scientific writing builds upon already published papers. Manual identification of publications to read, cite or consider as related papers relies on a researcher's ability to identify fitting keywords or initial papers from which a…
Peer review is a cornerstone of science. Research communities conduct peer reviews to assess contributions and to improve the overall quality of science work. Every year, new community members are recruited as peer reviewers for the first…
Peer review is a widely accepted mechanism for research evaluation, playing a pivotal role in academic publishing. However, criticisms have long been leveled at this mechanism, mostly because of its poor efficiency and low reproducibility.…
Peer review is the foundation of scientific publication, and the task of reviewing has long been seen as a cornerstone of professional service. However, the massive growth in the field of machine learning has put this community benefit…
The academic peer review system is under increasing pressure due to a growing volume of submissions and a limited pool of available reviewers, resulting in delayed decisions and an uneven distribution of reviewing responsibilities. Building…
A semi-supervised model of peer review is introduced that is intended to overcome the bias and incompleteness of traditional peer review. Traditional approaches are reliant on human biases, while consensus decision-making is constrained by…
The computing research community needs to work much harder to address the downsides of our innovations. Between the erosion of privacy, threats to democracy, and automation's effect on employment (among many other issues), we can no longer…
We propose an enhanced peer-review process where the reviewers are encouraged to truthfully disclose their reviews. We start by modelling that process using a Bayesian model where the uncertainty regarding the quality of the manuscript is…
The peer review process in major artificial intelligence (AI) conferences faces unprecedented challenges with the surge of paper submissions (exceeding 10,000 submissions per venue), accompanied by growing concerns over review quality and…
Peer review, the bedrock of scientific advancement in machine learning (ML), is strained by a crisis of scale. Exponential growth in manuscript submissions to premier ML venues such as NeurIPS, ICML, and ICLR is outpacing the finite…
The exponential growth of machine learning submissions has strained the traditional peer review process, resulting in slow feedback loops for authors and an immense burden on reviewers to rigorously audit technical soundness and verify…