Related papers: Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that i…

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…

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…

Scientific publishing is in a transition between the old paper-bound, static forms and the new electronic media with its interactive, dynamic possibilities. This takes place in the context of imploding library budgets and exploding magazine…

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…

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…

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…

Traditional closed peer review systems, which have played a central role in scientific publishing, are often slow, costly, non-transparent, stochastic, and possibly subject to biases - factors that can impede scientific progress and…

Peer review is the main mechanism by which the software engineering community assesses the quality of scientific results. However, the rapid growth of paper submissions in software engineering venues has outpaced the availability of…

Peer-review system has long been relied upon for bringing quality research to the notice of the scientific community and also preventing flawed research from entering into the literature. The need for the peer-review system has often been…

Peer review aims to detect flaws and deficiencies in the design and interpretation of studies, and ensure the clarity and quality of their presentation. However, it has been questioned whether peer review fulfils this function. Studies have…

This study examines a fundamental yet overlooked function of peer review: its role in exposing reviewers to new and unexpected ideas. Leveraging a natural experiment involving over half a million peer review invitations covering both…

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…

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…

Is it possible to reliably evaluate the quality of peer reviews? We study this question driven by two primary motivations -- incentivizing high-quality reviewing using assessed quality of reviews and measuring changes to review quality in…

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…

Peer review is a key activity intended to preserve the quality and integrity of scientific publications. However, in practice it is far from perfect. We aim at understanding how reviewers, including those who have won awards for reviewing,…

We develop a simple model of the scientific peer review process, in which authors of varying ability invest to produce papers of varying quality, and journals evaluate papers based on a noisy signal, choosing to accept or reject each paper.…

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…

Scientific publishing is facing an alarming proliferation of fraudulent practices that threaten the integrity of research communication. The production and dissemination of fake research have become a profitable business, undermining trust…

In computer science, conferences and journals conduct peer review in order to decide what to publish. Many have pointed out the inherent weaknesses in peer review, including those of bias, quality, and accountability. Many have suggested…