Related papers: Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that i…
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…
Peer review is a widely accepted mechanism for research evaluation, playing a pivotal role in academic publishing. However, criticisms have long been leveled at this mechanism, mostly because of its poor efficiency and low reproducibility.…
In this paper, we present a mathematical model to capture various factors which may influence the accuracy of a competitive group recommendation system. We apply this model to peer review systems, i.e., conference or research grants review,…
The advent of computers has allowed mathematicians to do increasingly more difficult computations that used to be practically impossible. Peer reviewers will seldom look at any code attached to a math paper, however. In this article, we…
Peer review forms the backbone of modern scientific manuscript evaluation. But after two hundred and eighty-nine years of egalitarian service to the scientific community, does this protocol remain fit for purpose in 2020? In this work, we…
Peer review, as a widely used practice to ensure the quality and integrity of publications, lacks a well-defined and common mechanism to self-incentivize virtuous behavior across all the conferences and journals. This is because information…
The increasing scale and variability of peer review in scholarly venues has created an urgent need for systematic, interpretable, and extensible tools to assess review quality. We present PeeriScope, a modular platform that integrates…
Peer review is the backbone of modern science. F1000Prime is a post-publication peer review system of the biomedical literature (papers from medical and biological journals). This study is concerned with the inter-rater reliability and…
Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing double blind peer review, and…
Peer review is the primary mechanism for evaluating scientific contributions, yet prior studies have mostly examined paper features or external metadata in isolation. The emergence of open platforms such as OpenReview has transformed peer…
Keeping up with the research literature plays an important role in the workflow of scientists - allowing them to understand a field, formulate the problems they focus on, and develop the solutions that they contribute, which in turn shape…
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…
The scholarly publishing ecosystem faces a dual crisis of unmanageable submission volumes and unregulated AI, creating an urgent need for new governance models to safeguard scientific integrity. The traditional human-only peer review regime…
Conducting a systematic review (SR) is comprised of multiple tasks: (i) collect documents (studies) that are likely to be relevant from digital libraries (eg., PubMed), (ii) manually read and label the documents as relevant or irrelevant,…
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 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…
Peer review and citation metrics are two means of gauging the value of scientific research, but the lack of publicly available peer review data makes the comparison of these methods difficult. Mathematics can serve as a useful laboratory…
The National Science Foundation (NSF) will be experimenting with a new distributed approach to reviewing proposals, whereby a group of principal investigators (PIs) or proposers in a subfield act as reviewers for the proposals submitted by…
Peer review is the cornerstone of academic publishing, yet the process is increasingly strained by rising submission volumes, reviewer overload, and expertise mismatches. Large language models (LLMs) are now being used as "reviewer aids,"…
Hunt for predatory journals is based on binary division of the publishing world to legitime and predatory journals. This leads to difficulties in labeling publishers like MDPI with questionable practices. However, the root cause is not the…