Related papers: TrueReview: A Platform for Post-Publication Peer R…
This study examines whether there is any evidence of bias in two areas of common critique of open, non-anonymous peer review - and used in the post-publication, peer review system operated by the open-access scholarly publishing platform…
Despite peer-reviewing being an essential component of academia since the 1600s, it has repeatedly received criticisms for lack of transparency and consistency. We posit that recent work in machine learning and explainable AI provide tools…
Pre-print repositories have seen a significant increase in use over the past fifteen years across multiple research domains. Researchers are beginning to develop applications capable of using these repositories to assist the scientific…
Scientific publishing seems to be at a turning point. Its paradigm has stayed basically the same for 300 years but is now challenged by the increasing volume of articles that makes it very hard for scientists to stay up to date in their…
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…
Peer review shapes which scientific claims enter the published record, but its internal dynamics are hard to measure at scale because reviewer criticism and author revision are usually embedded in long, unstructured correspondence. Here we…
The number of scientific articles produced every year is growing rapidly. Providing quality control over them is crucial for scientists and, ultimately, for the public good. In modern science, this process is largely delegated to peer…
The number of scientific publications is constantly rising, increasing the strain on the review process. The number of submissions is actually higher, as each manuscript is often reviewed several times before publication. To face the deluge…
Traditional closed peer review systems, which have played a central role in scientific publishing, are often slow, costly, non-transparent, stochastic, and possibly subject to biases - factors that can impede scientific progress and…
Scholarly journals rely on peer review to identify the science most worthy of publication. Yet finding willing and qualified reviewers to evaluate manuscripts has become an increasingly challenging task, possibly even threatening the…
Peer-review venues have increasingly adopted open reviewing policies that publicly release anonymized reviews and permit public commenting. Venues have adopted a variety of policies, and there is still ongoing debate about the benefits and…
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…
To help researchers conduct a systematic review or meta-analysis as efficiently and transparently as possible, we designed a tool (ASReview) to accelerate the step of screening titles and abstracts. For many tasks - including but not…
We advocate the publication of review/survey articles that will be updated regularly, both in traditional journals and novel venues. We call these "perpetual reviews." This idea naturally builds on the dissemination and archival…
An increasing number of scientific publications are created in open and transparent peer review models: a submission is published first, and then reviewers are invited, or a submission is reviewed in a closed environment but then these…
Social and technical trends have significantly changed methods for evaluating and disseminating computing research. Traditional venues for reviewing and publishing, such as conferences and journals, worked effectively in the past. Recently,…
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…
In this article we wish to provide a common set of best practice approaches that should be considered for all effective research grant proposal reviews. The federal government performs a critical role in American competitiveness and…
While peer review enhances writing and research quality, harsh feedback can frustrate and demotivate authors. Hence, it is essential to explore how critiques should be delivered to motivate authors and enable them to keep iterating their…
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…