Related papers: Double blind vs. open review: an evolutionary game…
In this paper, we navigate the intricate domain of reviewer rewards in open-access academic publishing, leveraging the precision of mathematics and the strategic acumen of game theory. We conceptualize the prevailing voucher-based reviewer…
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…
Large language models offer a tempting solution to address the peer review crisis. This position paper argues that today's AI systems should not be used to produce paper reviews. We ground this position in an empirical comparison of human-…
It is not easy to rationalize how peer review, as the current grassroots of science, can work based on voluntary contributions of reviewers. There is no rationale to write impartial and thorough evaluations. Consequently, there is no risk…
A simulation model based on parallel systems is established, aiming to explore the relation between the number of submissions and the overall standard of academic journals within a similar discipline under peer review. The model can…
Feedback-evolving games is a framework that models the co-evolution between payoff functions and an environmental state. It serves as a useful tool to analyze many social dilemmas such as natural resource consumption, behaviors in…
The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has inspired researchers to integrate them extensively into the academic workflow, potentially reshaping how research is practiced and reviewed. While previous studies highlight the…
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…
In this paper, we analyse inspection games with an evolutionary perspective. In our evolutionary inspection game with a large population, each individual is not a rational payoff maximiser, but periodically updates his strategy if he…
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…
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…
Peer review is widely regarded as essential for advancing scientific research. However, reviewers may be biased by authors' prestige or other characteristics. Double-blind peer review, in which the authors' identities are masked from the…
For improving the performance and effectiveness of peer review, a novel review system is proposed, based on analysis of peer review process for academic journals under a parallel model built via Monte Carlo method. The model can simulate…
Double-blind peer review mechanism has become the skeleton of academic research across multiple disciplines including computer science, yet several studies have questioned the quality of peer reviews and raised concerns on potential biases…
Each participant in peer-to-peer network prefers to free-ride on the contribution of other participants. Reputation based resource sharing is a way to control the free riding. Instead of classical game theory we use evolutionary game theory…
This article challenges the assumption that journals and peer review are essential for developing,evaluating and disseminating scientific and other academic knowledge. It suggests a more flexible ecosystem, and examines some of the…
Across scholarly communities, manuscripts face similar evaluative rituals: editors invite experts to privately assess submissions through formal peer reviews. This closed, loosely structured, and publisher-mediated process is now being…
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…
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…
Understanding the evolution of human social systems requires flexible formalisms for the emergence of institutions. Although game theory is normally used to model interactions individually, larger spaces of games can be helpful for modeling…