相关论文: An Algorithm to Determine Peer-Reviewers

The increasing volume of papers and proposals that undergo peer review emphasizes the pressing need for greater automation to effectively manage the growing scale. In this study, we present the deployment and evaluation of machine learning…

With the rapid increase in paper submissions to academic conferences, the need for automated and accurate paper-reviewer matching is more critical than ever. Previous efforts in this area have considered various factors to assess the…

Peer review is essential for scientific progress but faces growing challenges due to increasing submission volumes and reviewer fatigue. Existing automated review approaches struggle with factual accuracy, rating consistency, and analytical…

Recommender systems use algorithms to provide users with product or service recommendations. Recently, these systems have been using machine learning algorithms from the field of artificial intelligence. However, choosing a suitable machine…

This paper explores a dual score system that simultaneously evaluates the relative importance of researchers and their works. It is a modification of the CITEX algorithm recently described in Pal and Ruj (2015). Using available publication…

While peer review enhances writing and research quality, harsh feedback can frustrate and demotivate authors. Hence, it is essential to explore how critiques should be delivered to motivate authors and enable them to keep iterating their…

Systematic reviews are essential to summarizing the results of different clinical and social science studies. The first step in a systematic review task is to identify all the studies relevant to the review. The task of identifying relevant…

Peer selection, the evaluation and selection of agents by their peers, is an important problem in the field of computational social choice; with applications to grading in massively online courses (MOOCs) and academic peer review. Current…

Peer grading systems aggregate noisy reports from multiple students to approximate a true grade as closely as possible. Most current systems either take the mean or median of reported grades; others aim to estimate students' grading…

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…

Large language models offer a tempting solution to address the peer review crisis. This position paper argues that today's AI systems should not be used to produce paper reviews. We ground this position in an empirical comparison of human-…

Automated decision systems increasingly rely on human oversight to ensure accuracy in uncertain cases. This paper presents a practical framework for optimizing such human-in-the-loop classification systems using a double-threshold policy.…

Existing models for ranking documents(mostly in world wide web) are prestige based. In this article, three algorithms to objectively judge the merit of a document are proposed - 1) Citation graph maxflow 2) Recursive Gloss Overlap based…

Comments received from referees during peer-review were analysed to determine the rates of duplication and partial duplication. It is very unusual for 2 different referees to submit identical comments, so the rare cases where this happens…

Peer review serves as a backbone of academic research, but in most AI conferences, the review quality is degrading as the number of submissions explodes. To reliably detect low-quality reviews, we define misinformed review points as either…

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…

Peer review is our best tool for judging the quality of conference submissions, but it is becoming increasingly spurious. We argue that a part of the problem is that the reviewers and area chairs face a poorly defined task forcing…

Effective peer code review in collaborative software development necessitates useful reviewer comments and supportive automated tools. Code review comments are a central component of the Modern Code Review process in the industry and…

Refereeing is a crucial component of publishing astronomical research, but few professional astronomers receive formal training on how to effectively referee a manuscript. In this article, we lay out considerations and best practices for…

How can we distinguish whether a peer review was written by a human or generated by an AI model? We argue that, in this setting, authorship should not be attributed solely from the textual features of a review, but also from the ideas,…