Related papers: Distributed peer review enhanced with natural lang…
The European Southern Observatory (ESO) implemented a new paradigm called Distributed Peer Review (DPR) as part of its proposal evaluation process in Period 110. Under DPR, Principal Investigators who submit proposals agree to review a…
The procedure that is currently employed to allocate time on telescopes is horribly onerous on those unfortunate astronomers who serve on the committees that administer the process, and is in danger of complete collapse as the number of…
The paper describes a potential platform to facilitate academic peer review with emphasis on early-stage research. This platform aims to make peer review more accurate and timely by rewarding reviewers on the basis of peer prediction…
Peer reviews, evaluations, and selections are a fundamental aspect of modern science. Funding bodies the world over employ experts to review and select the best proposals from those submitted for funding. The problem of peer selection,…
In response to the challenges presented by high reviewer workloads in traditional panel reviews and increasing numbers of submitted proposals, ALMA implemented distributed peer review to assess the majority of proposals submitted to the…
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…
One of the virtues of peer review is that it provides a self-regulating selection mechanism for scientific work, papers and projects. Peer review as a selection mechanism is hard to evaluate in terms of its efficiency. Serious efforts to…
The increasing volume of papers and proposals that undergo peer review emphasizes the pressing need for greater automation to effectively manage the growing scale. In this study, we present the deployment and evaluation of machine learning…
Peer review is the most common mechanism in place for assessing requests for resources in a large variety of scientific disciplines. One of the strongest criticisms to this paradigm is the limited reproducibility of the process, especially…
Peer review is a laborious, yet essential, part of academic publishing with crucial impact on the scientific endeavor. The current lack of incentives and transparency harms the credibility of this process. Researchers are neither rewarded…
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…
Collaborative filtering is amongst the most preferred techniques when implementing recommender systems. Recently, great interest has turned towards parallel and distributed implementations of collaborative filtering algorithms. This work is…
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…
The peer-review process is the most widely accepted certification mechanism for officially accepting the written results of researchers within the scientific community. An essential component of peer-review is the identification of…
Peer review is the primary means of quality control in academia; as an outcome of a peer review process, program and area chairs make acceptance decisions for each paper based on the review reports and scores they received. Quality of…
Artificial intelligence has made remarkable progress in handling complex tasks, thanks to advances in hardware acceleration and machine learning algorithms. However, to acquire more accurate outcomes and solve more complex issues,…
We propose an academic publishing system where research papers are stored in a network of data centres owned by university libraries and research institutions, and are interfaced with the academic community through a website. In our system,…
Peer review remains the central quality-control mechanism of science, yet its ability to fulfill this role is increasingly strained. Empirical studies document serious shortcomings: long publication delays, escalating reviewer burden…
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…
The importance of peer-review in the scientific process can not be overestimated. Yet, due to increasing pressures of research and exponentially growing number of publications the task faced by the referees becomes ever more difficult. We…