Related papers: Reviewer assignment problem: A scoping review
Scientific writing builds upon already published papers. Manual identification of publications to read, cite or consider as related papers relies on a researcher's ability to identify fitting keywords or initial papers from which a…
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…
Amidst the ever-expanding realm of scientific production and the proliferation of predatory journals, the focus on peer review remains paramount for scientometricians and sociologists of science. Despite this attention, there is a notable…
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…
Academic research is an exploration activity to solve problems that have never been resolved before. By this nature, each academic research work is required to perform a literature review to distinguish its novelties that have not been…
This paper proposes an architecture and assignment management model of a conference management system that performs a precise and accurate automatic assignment of reviewers to papers. The system relies on taxonomy of keywords to describe…
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…
Recent successes in the Machine Learning community have led to a steep increase in the number of papers submitted to conferences. This increase made more prominent some of the issues that affect the current review process used by these…
A `peer-review system' in the context of judging research contributions, is one of the prime steps undertaken to ensure the quality of the submissions received, a significant portion of the publishing budget is spent towards successful…
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…
Despite their growing use in academic writing and statistical analysis, the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scientific peer review remains a largely unexplored area. A key challenge is jagged AI, a phenomenon where AI…
Background: Research software is crucial for enabling research discoveries and supporting data analysis, simulation, and interpretation across domains. However, evolving requirements, complex inputs, and legacy dependencies hinder the…
The exponential growth of machine learning submissions has strained the traditional peer review process, resulting in slow feedback loops for authors and an immense burden on reviewers to rigorously audit technical soundness and verify…
Readability assessment is the task of evaluating the reading difficulty of a given piece of text. Although research on computational approaches to readability assessment is now two decades old, there is not much work on synthesizing this…
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…
As academic literature proliferates, traditional review methods are increasingly challenged by the sheer volume and diversity of available research. This article presents a study that aims to address these challenges by enhancing the…
Recent advancements in large language models have sparked interest in utilizing them to aid the peer review process of scientific publication amid the peer review crisis. However, having AI models generate full reviews in the same way as…
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…
A major threat to the peer-review systems of computer science conferences is the existence of "collusion rings" between reviewers. In such collusion rings, reviewers who have also submitted their own papers to the conference work together…
Citing comprehensively and appropriately has become a challenging task with the explosive growth of scientific publications. Current citation recommendation systems aim to recommend a list of scientific papers for a given text context or a…