Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
To this date, the efficacy of the scientific publishing enterprise fundamentally rests on the strength of the peer review process.
Scibert: Pretrained contextualized embeddings for scientific text
Iz Beltagy, Arman Cohan, and Kyle Lo. 2019 · 1903
Earlier work this paper cites.
Roberta: A robustly optimized BERT pretraining approach
Yinhan Liu, Myle Ott, Naman Goyal, Jingfei Du, Mandar Joshi, Danqi Chen, Omer Levy, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2019 · 1907
Earlier work this paper cites.
Distilbert, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter
Victor Sanh, Lysandre Debut, Julien Chaumond, and Thomas Wolf. 2019 · 1910
Earlier work this paper cites.
A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales
Jacob Cohen. 1960 · 1960
Earlier work this paper cites.
Finding contradictions in text
Marie-Catherine De Marneffe, Anna N Rafferty, and Christopher D Manning. 2008 · 2008
Earlier work this paper cites.
The luck of the referee draw: the effect of exchanging reviews
Lutz Bornmann and Hans-Dieter Daniel. 2009 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
Relative status of journal and conference publications in computer science
Jill Freyne, Lorcan Coyle, Barry Smyth, and Padraig Cunningham. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Multi-instance multi-label learning networks for aspect-category sentiment analysis
Yuncong Li, Cunxiang Yin, Sheng-hua Zhong, and Xu Pan. 2020 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
2 - peer review in a rapidly evolving publishing landscape
Irene Hames. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Helpfulness-guided review summarization
Wenting Xiong. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Peer review in scientific publications: Benefits, critiques, & a survival guide
Jacalyn Kelly, Tara Sadeghieh, and Khosrow Adeli. 2014 · 2014
Earlier work this paper cites.
Automatic identification of potentially contradictory claims to support systematic reviews
Abdulaziz Alamri and Mark Stevenson. 2015 · 2015
Earlier work this paper cites.
The arbitrariness of reviews, and advice for school administrators
John Langford and Mark Guzdial. 2015 · 2015
Earlier work this paper cites.
Contradiction detection for rumorous claims
Piroska Lendvai and Uwe D. Reichel. 2016 · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
Design and analysis of the NIPS 2016 review process
Nihar B. Shah, Behzad Tabibian, Krikamol Muandet, Isabelle Guyon, and Ulrike von Luxburg. 2018 · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
Peer review quality and transparency of the peer-review process in open access and subscription journals
J.M. Wicherts. 2016 · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
How to deal with conflicting reviewer comments
Anne Borcherds and Managing Editor. 2017 · 2017
Cited alongside, same era.
Enhanced LSTM for natural language inference
Qian Chen, Xiaodan Zhu, Zhen-Hua Ling, Si Wei, Hui Jiang, and Diana Inkpen. 2017 · 2017
Cited alongside, same era.
Peer Review: A System under Stress
Robert E. Gropp, Scott Glisson, Stephen Gallo, and Lisa Thompson. 2017 · 2017
Cited alongside, same era.
Contradiction detection with contradiction-specific word embedding
Luyang Li, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2017 · 2017
Cited alongside, same era.
Predicting contradiction intensity: Low, strong or very strong?
Ismail Badache, Sébastien Fournier, and Adrian-Gabriel Chifu. 2018b · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Natural language inference over interaction space
Yichen Gong, Heng Luo, and Jian Zhang. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Arbitrariness in the peer review process
Elise S. Brezis and Aliaksandr Birukou. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
Aspect-based sentiment analysis of scientific reviews
Souvic Chakraborty, Pawan Goyal, and Animesh Mukherjee. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
APE: Argument pair extraction from peer review and rebuttal via multi-task learning
Liying Cheng, Lidong Bing, Qian Yu, Wei Lu, and Luo Si. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
SPECTER: document-level representation learning using citation-informed transformers
Arman Cohan, Sergey Feldman, Iz Beltagy, Doug Downey, and Daniel S. Weld. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
Adversarial NLI: A new benchmark for natural language understanding
Yixin Nie, Adina Williams, Emily Dinan, Mohit Bansal, Jason Weston, and Douwe Kiela. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
What can we do to improve peer review in NLP?
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
A dataset of peer reviews (PeerRead): Collection, insights and NLP applications
Dongyeop Kang, Waleed Ammar, Bhavana Dalvi, Madeleine van Zuylen, Sebastian Kohlmeier, Eduard Hovy, and Roy Schwartz. 2018a · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
A computational approach to finding contradictions in user opinionated text
Chuqin Li, Xi Niu, Ahmad Al-Doulat, and Noseong Park. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Empowering peer reviewers with a checklist to improve transparency
Timothy Parker, Simon Griffith, Judith Bronstein, Fiona Fidler, Susan Foster, Hannah Fraser, Wolfgang Forstmeier, Jessica Gurevitch, Julia Koricheva, Ralf Seppelt, Morgan Tingley, and Shinichi Nakagawa. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding
Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
DeepSentiPeer: Harnessing sentiment in review texts to recommend peer review decisions
Tirthankar Ghosal, Rajeev Verma, Asif Ekbal, and Pushpak Bhattacharyya. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Argument mining for understanding peer reviews
Xinyu Hua, Mitko Nikolov, Nikhil Badugu, and Lu Wang. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Anna Rogers and Isabelle Augenstein. 2020a · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
What can we do to improve peer review in nlp?
Anna Rogers and Isabelle Augenstein. 2020b · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
Ai-assisted peer review
Alessandro Checco, Lorenzo Bracciale, Pierpaolo Loreti, Stephen Pinfield, and Giuseppe Bianchi. 2021 · 2021
Later among the works it cites.
Macro-average: Rare types are important too
Thamme Gowda, Weiqiu You, Constantine Lignos, and Jonathan May. 2021 · 2021
Later among the works it cites.
Sharing is caring! joint multitask learning helps aspect-category extraction and sentiment detection in scientific peer reviews
Sandeep Kumar, Tirthankar Ghosal, Prabhat Kumar Bharti, and Asif Ekbal. 2021 · 2021
Later among the works it cites.
Prior and prejudice: The novice reviewers’ bias against resubmissions in conference peer review
Ivan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh, and Hal Daumé III. 2021 · 2021
Later among the works it cites.
Can we automate scientific reviewing?
Weizhe Yuan, Pengfei Liu, and Graham Neubig. 2021 · 2021
Later among the works it cites.
Peer review analyze: A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews
Tirthankar Ghosal, Sandeep Kumar, Prabhat Kumar Bharti, and Asif Ekbal. 2022 · 2022
Later among the works it cites.
Deepaspeer: towards an aspect-level sentiment controllable framework for decision prediction from academic peer reviews
Sandeep Kumar, Hardik Arora, Tirthankar Ghosal, and Asif Ekbal. 2022 · 2022
Later among the works it cites.
Contradiction in reviews: Is it strong or low?
Ismail Badache, Sébastien Fournier, and Adrian-Gabriel Chifu. 2018a · 2078
Closest in time.