Related papers: Accelerating the pace of discovery by changing the…
A successful peer review process requires that qualified and interested reviewers are assigned to each paper. Most automated reviewer assignment approaches estimate a real-valued affinity score for each paper-reviewer pair that acts as a…
Peer review is fundamental to the integrity and advancement of scientific publication. Traditional methods of peer review analyses often rely on exploration and statistics of existing peer review data, which do not adequately address the…
Peer review is essential for scientific progress but faces growing challenges due to increasing submission volumes and reviewer fatigue. Existing automated review approaches struggle with factual accuracy, rating consistency, and analytical…
A recent report of Littmann [Commun. ACM '21] outlines the existence and the fatal impact of collusion rings in academic peer reviewing. We introduce and analyze the problem Cycle-Free Reviewing that aims at finding a review assignment…
Public agencies like the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) award tens of billions of dollars in annual science funding. How can this money be distributed as efficiently as possible to best…
Research software is increasingly recognized as a vital component of the scholarly record. Journals offer authors the opportunity to publish research software papers, but often have different requirements for how these publications should…
The purpose of scholarly peer review is to evaluate the quality of scientific manuscripts. However, study after study demonstrates that peer review neither effectively nor reliably assesses research quality. Empirical standards attempt to…
Authorship of scientific articles has profoundly changed from early science until now. If once upon a time a paper was authored by a handful of authors, scientific collaborations are much more prominent on average nowadays. As authorship…
Publishing scientific journals governed by editors relying on anonymous peer reviewing is slow (even one round of reviewing involves several communications between authors, editor and reviewers), partial (arguments of authors can hardly…
US funding agencies alone distribute a yearly total of roughly $65B dollars largely through the process of proposal peer review: scientists compete for project funding by submitting grant proposals which are evaluated by selected panels of…
Peer review lies at the core of the academic process, but even well-intentioned reviewers can still provide noisy ratings. While ranking papers by average ratings may reduce noise, varying noise levels and systematic biases stemming from…
In peer review, reviewers are usually asked to provide scores for the papers. The scores are then used by Area Chairs or Program Chairs in various ways in the decision-making process. The scores are usually elicited in a quantized form to…
Peer review is a process designed to produce a fair assessment of research quality before the publication of scholarly work in a journal. Demographics, nepotism, and seniority have been all shown to affect reviewer behavior suggesting the…
Peer reviewing is a central process in modern research and essential for ensuring high quality and reliability of published work. At the same time, it is a time-consuming process and increasing interest in emerging fields often results in a…
Today's peer review process for scientific articles is unnecessarily opaque and offers few incentives to referees. Likewise, the publishing process is unnecessarily inefficient and its results are only rarely made freely available to the…
Peer review is a key component of the publishing process in most fields of science. The increasing submission rates put a strain on reviewing quality and efficiency, motivating the development of applications to support the reviewing and…
Globally, recommendation services have become important due to the fact that they support e-commerce applications and different research communities. Recommender systems have a large number of applications in many fields including economic,…
Scientific publishing is the means by which we communicate and share scientific knowledge, but this process currently often lacks transparency and machine-interpretable representations. Scientific articles are published in long…
Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing double blind peer review, and…
Citation metrics are becoming pervasive in the quantitative evaluation of scholars, journals and institutions. More then ever before, hiring, promotion, and funding decisions rely on a variety of impact metrics that cannot disentangle…