Related papers: What Have We Learned from OpenReview?
Open source software projects usually acknowledge contributions with text files, websites, and other idiosyncratic methods. These data sources are hard to mine, which is why contributorship is most frequently measured through changes to…
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…
Modern machine learning and computer science conferences are experiencing a surge in the number of submissions that challenges the quality of peer review as the number of competent reviewers is growing at a much slower rate. To curb this…
The reproducibility of scientific findings are an important hallmark of quality and integrity in research. The scientific method requires hypotheses to be subjected to the most crucial tests, and for the results to be consistent across…
This work aims to study a count response random variable, the number of citations of a research paper, affected by some explanatory variables through a suitable regression model. Due to the fact that the count variable exhibits substantial…
Peer review is a core element of the scientific process, particularly in conference-centered fields such as ML and NLP. However, only few studies have evaluated its properties empirically. Aiming to fill this gap, we present a corpus that…
Opinions in scientific research papers can be divergent, leading to controversies among reviewers. However, most existing datasets for opinion summarization are centered around product reviews and assume that the analyzed opinions are…
In this paper and demo we present a crowd and crowd+AI based system, called CrowdRev, supporting the screening phase of literature reviews and achieving the same quality as author classification at a fraction of the cost, and…
This article uses Google Scholar (GS) as a source of data to analyse Open Access (OA) levels across all countries and fields of research. All articles and reviews with a DOI and published in 2009 or 2014 and covered by the three main…
The trend toward open science increases the pressure on authors to provide access to the source code and data they used to compute the results reported in their scientific papers. Since sharing materials reproducibly is challenging, several…
We propose the new cloud-based service OpenResearch for managing and analyzing data about scientific events such as conferences and workshops in a persistent and reliable way. This includes data about scientific articles, participants,…
With the Open Science approach becoming important for research, the evolution towards open scientific-paper reviews is making an impact on the scientific community. However, there is a lack of publicly available resources for conducting…
The SOAP (Study of Open Access Publishing) project has compiled data on the present offer for open access publishing in online peer-reviewed journals. Starting from the Directory of Open Access Journals, several sources of data are…
The exponential growth of scientific production makes secondary literature abridgements increasingly demanding. We introduce a new open-source framework for systematic reviews that significantly reduces time and workload for collecting and…
Overlay journals are characterised by their articles being published on open access repositories, often already starting in their initial preprint form as a prerequisite for submission to the journal prior to initiating the peer-review…
Massive numbers of meta-analysis studies are being published. A Google Scholar search of "systematic review and meta-analysis" returns about 452k hits since 2014. The search was done on Jan 14, 2019. There is a need to have some way to…
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…
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…
Peer review is a multi-stage process involving reviews, rebuttals, meta-reviews, final decisions, and subsequent manuscript revisions. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have motivated methods that assist or automate different…
Providing constructive feedback to paper authors is a core component of peer review. With reviewers increasingly having less time to perform reviews, automated support systems are required to ensure high reviewing quality, thus making the…