Related papers: Who Should Review Your Proposal? Interdisciplinary…
Research in AI evaluation has grown increasingly complex and multidisciplinary, attracting researchers with diverse backgrounds and objectives. As a result, divergent evaluation paradigms have emerged, often developing in isolation,…
Current research has explored how Generative AI can support the brainstorming process for content creators, but a gap remains in exploring support-tools for the pre-writing process. Specifically, our research is focused on supporting users…
Peer review is a critical process for ensuring the integrity of published scientific research. Confidence in this process is predicated on the assumption that experts in the relevant domain give careful consideration to the merits of…
In this work we address the problem of argument search. The purpose of argument search is the distillation of pro and contra arguments for requested topics from large text corpora. In previous works, the usual approach is to use a standard…
Automated reviewer recommendation for scientific conferences currently relies on the assumption that the program committee has the necessary expertise to handle all submissions. However, topical discrepancies between received submissions…
Data intensive research requires the support of appropriate datasets. However, it is often time-consuming to discover usable datasets matching a specific research topic. We formulate the dataset discovery problem on an attributed…
Criteria are an essential component of any procedure for assessing merit. Yet, little is known about the criteria peers use in assessing grant applications. In this systematic review we therefore identify and synthesize studies that examine…
The appeal of metric evaluation of research impact has attracted considerable interest in recent times. Although the public at large and administrative bodies are much interested in the idea, scientists and other researchers are much more…
The rapid growth of AI conference submissions has created an overwhelming reviewing burden. To alleviate this, recent venues such as ICLR 2026 introduced a reviewer nomination policy: each submission must nominate one of its authors as a…
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…
In the ever-expanding landscape of academic research, the proliferation of ideas presents a significant challenge for researchers: discerning valuable ideas from the less impactful ones. The ability to efficiently evaluate the potential of…
Interdisciplinary collaboration has become a driving force for scientific breakthroughs, and evaluating scholars' performance in interdisciplinary researches is essential for promoting such collaborations. However, traditional scholar…
Peer review is an essential process to determine the quality of papers submitted to scientific conferences or journals. However, it is subjective and prone to biases. Several studies have been conducted to apply techniques from NLP to…
To this date, the efficacy of the scientific publishing enterprise fundamentally rests on the strength of the peer review process. The journal editor or the conference chair primarily relies on the expert reviewers' assessment, identify…
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…
Expert domain writing, such as scientific writing, typically demands extensive domain knowledge. Although large language models (LLMs) show promising potential in this task, evaluating the quality of automatically generated scientific…
Early identification of emergent topics is of eminent importance due to their potential impacts on society. There are many methods for detecting emerging terms and topics, all with advantages and drawbacks. However, there is no consensus…
Peer review is the backbone of academia and humans constitute a cornerstone of this process, being responsible for reviewing papers and making the final acceptance/rejection decisions. Given that human decision making is known to be…
The increasing volume of scientific publications and grant proposals has generated an unprecedentedly high workload to scientific communities. Consequently, review quality has been decreasing and review outcomes have become less correlated…
Extracting and identifying latent topics in large text corpora has gained increasing importance in Natural Language Processing (NLP). Most models, whether probabilistic models similar to Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) or neural topic…