Related papers: Algorithmic Evaluation and the Marginalization of …
The issue of gender bias in scientific publications has been a topic of ongoing debate. One aspect of this debate concerns whether women receive equal credit for their contributions compared to men. Conventional wisdom suggests that women…
Structural inequalities persist in society, conferring systematic advantages to some people at the expense of others, for example, by giving them substantially more influence and opportunities. Using bibliometric data about authors of…
Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are fundamental to scientific progress, yet the process is hindered by a fragmented tool ecosystem that imposes a high cognitive load. This friction suppresses the iterative, exploratory nature of…
The exploratory analysis developed in this paper relies on the hypothesis that each editor possesses some power in the definition of the editorial policy of her journal. Consequently if the same scholar sits on the board of editors of two…
In multiple academic disciplines, having a perceived gender of `woman' is associated with a lower than expected rate of citations. In some fields, that disparity is driven primarily by the citations of men and is increasing over time…
Cognitive science often evaluates theories through narrow paradigms and local model comparisons, limiting the integration of evidence across tasks and realizations. We introduce an automated adversarial collaboration framework for…
This article introduces the concept of \textit{authoritarian recursion} to theorize how AI systems consolidate institutional control across education, warfare, and digital discourse. It identifies a shared recursive architecture in which…
Peer review is a cornerstone of modern scientific endeavor. However, there is growing consensus that several limitations of the current peer review system, from lack of incentives to reviewers to lack of transparency, risks to undermine its…
Autonomous editorial systems represent an emerging class of computational frameworks that transform how large volumes of information are ingested, organized, and analyzed. This work presents a structured, continuously operating editorial…
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…
We consider three important challenges in conference peer review: (i) reviewers maliciously attempting to get assigned to certain papers to provide positive reviews, possibly as part of quid-pro-quo arrangements with the authors; (ii)…
The rapid expansion of AI research has intensified the Reviewer Gap, threatening the peer-review sustainability and perpetuating a cycle of low-quality evaluations. This position paper critiques existing LLM approaches that automatically…
Critique between peers plays a vital role in the production of scientific knowledge. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence on the origins of criticism, its effects on the papers and individuals involved, and its visibility within the…
This paper is about the possible negative impact of excessive collaboration on the performance of top employees. With the rise of participatory culture and developments in communications technology, management practices require greater…
Measurement is a complicated but very necessary task. Many indices have been created in an effort to define the quality of knowledge produced but they have attracted strong criticism, having become synonymous with individualism, competition…
Research collaboration is promoted by governments and research funders but if the relative prevalence and merits of collaboration vary internationally different national and disciplinary strategies may be needed to promote it. This study…
Gender differences in collaborative research have received little attention when compared with the growing importance that women hold in academia and research. Unsurprisingly, most of bibliometric databases have a strong lack of directly…
Since its beginnings in the 1940s, automated reasoning by computers has become a tool of ever growing importance in scientific research. So far, the rules underlying automated reasoning have mainly been formulated by humans, in the form of…
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…
Generative AI acts as a disruptive technological shock to evaluative organizations. In academic peer review, it enters both sides of the market: authors use AI to polish submissions, and reviewers use it to generate plausible reports…