Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
We present OpenReviewer, an open-source system for generating high-quality peer reviews of machine learning and AI conference papers.
Gradio: Hassle-free sharing and testing of ML models in the wild
Abubakar Abid, Ali Abdalla, Ali Abid, Dawood Khan, Abdulrahman Alfozan, and James Y. Zou. 2019 · 1906
Earlier work this paper cites.
Development of the review quality instrument (RQI) for assessing peer reviews of manuscripts
Susan van Rooyen, Nick Black, and Fiona Godlee. 1999 · 1999
Earlier work this paper cites.
The Toronto Paper Matching System: An automated paper-reviewer assignment system
Laurent Charlin and Richard Zemel. 2013 · 2013
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.
Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review
Andrew Tomkins, Min Zhang, and William D. Heavlin. 2017 · 2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
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. 2018 · 2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
Your 2 is my 1, your 3 is my 9: Handling arbitrary miscalibrations in ratings
Jingyan Wang and Nihar B. Shah. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Simple and effective paraphrastic similarity from parallel translations
John Wieting, Kevin Gimpel, Graham Neubig, and Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
The diversity–innovation paradox in science
Bas Hofstra, Vivek V. Kulkarni, Sebastian Munoz-Najar Galvez, Bryan He, Dan Jurafsky, and Daniel A. McFarland. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Zero: memory optimizations toward training trillion parameter models
Samyam Rajbhandari, Jeff Rasley, Olatunji Ruwase, and Yuxiong He. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
What can we do to improve peer review in NLP?
Anna Rogers and Isabelle Augenstein. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Reviewrobot: Explainable paper review generation based on knowledge synthesis
Qingyun Wang, Qi Zeng, Lifu Huang, Kevin Knight, Heng Ji, and Nazneen Fatema Rajani. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Uncovering latent biases in text: Method and application to peer review
Emaad A. Manzoor and Nihar B. Shah. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Revise and resubmit: An intertextual model of text-based collaboration in peer review
Ilia Kuznetsov, Jan Buchmann, Max Eichler, and Iryna Gurevych. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Can we automate scientific reviewing?
Weizhe Yuan, Pengfei Liu, and Graham Neubig. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Nlpeer: A unified resource for the computational study of peer review
Nils Dycke, Ilia Kuznetsov, and Iryna Gurevych. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention
Woosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng, Lianmin Zheng, Cody Hao Yu, Joseph Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Summarizing multiple documents with conversational structure for meta-review generation
The llama 3 herd of models
Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, Anirudh Goyal, Anthony Hartshorn, Aobo Yang, Archi Mitra, Archie Sravankumar, Artem Korenev, Arthur Hinsvark, Arun Rao, Aston Zhang, Aurélien Rodriguez, Austen Gregerson, Ava Spataru, Baptiste Rozière, Bethany Biron, Binh Tang, Bobbie Chern, Charlotte Caucheteux, Chaya Nayak, Chloe Bi, Chris Marra, Chris McConnell, Christian Keller, Christophe Touret, Chunyang Wu, Corinne Wong, Cristian Canton Ferrer, Cyrus Nikolaidis, Damien Allonsius, Daniel Song, Danielle Pintz, Danny Livshits, David Esiobu, Dhruv Choudhary, Dhruv Mahajan, Diego Garcia-Olano, Diego Perino, Dieuwke Hupkes, Egor Lakomkin, Ehab AlBadawy, Elina Lobanova, Emily Dinan, Eric Michael Smith, Filip Radenovic, Frank Zhang, Gabriel Synnaeve, Gabrielle Lee, Georgia Lewis Anderson, Graeme Nail, Grégoire Mialon, Guan Pang, Guillem Cucurell, Hailey Nguyen, Hannah Korevaar, Hu Xu, Hugo Touvron, Iliyan Zarov, Imanol Arrieta Ibarra, Isabel M. Kloumann, Ishan Misra, Ivan Evtimov, Jade Copet, Jaewon Lee, Jan Geffert, Jana Vranes, Jason Park, Jay Mahadeokar, Jeet Shah, Jelmer van der Linde, Jennifer Billock, Jenny Hong, Jenya Lee, Jeremy Fu, Jianfeng Chi, Jianyu Huang, Jiawen Liu, Jie Wang, Jiecao Yu, Joanna Bitton, Joe Spisak, Jongsoo Park, Joseph Rocca, Joshua Johnstun, Joshua Saxe, Junteng Jia, Kalyan Vasuden Alwala, Kartikeya Upasani, Kate Plawiak, Ke Li, Kenneth Heafield, Kevin Stone, and et al. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Limgen: Probing the llms for generating suggestive limitations of research papers
Abdur Rahman Bin Mohammed Faizullah, Ashok Urlana, and Rahul Mishra. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Reviewer2: Optimizing review generation through prompt generation
Zhaolin Gao, Kianté Brantley, and Thorsten Joachims. 2024 · 2024
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Miao Li, Eduard Hovy, and Jey Lau. 2023a · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Weixin Liang, Yuhui Zhang, Hancheng Cao, Binglu Wang, Daisy Ding, Xinyu Yang, Kailas Vodrahalli, Siyu He, Daniel Scott Smith, Yian Yin, Daniel A. McFarland, and James Zou. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Reviewergpt? an exploratory study on using large language models for paper reviewing
Ryan Liu and Nihar B. Shah. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Judging llm-as-a-judge with mt-bench and chatbot arena
Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric P. Xing, Hao Zhang, Joseph E. Gonzalez, and Ion Stoica. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Nougat: Neural optical understanding for academic documents
Lukas Blecher, Guillem Cucurull, Thomas Scialom, and Robert Stojnic. 2024 · 2024
Cited alongside, same era.
Flashattention-2: Faster attention with better parallelism and work partitioning
Tri Dao. 2024 · 2024
Cited alongside, same era.
Alpacaeval: An automatic evaluator of instruction-following models
Xuechen Li, Tianyi Zhang, Yann Dubois, Rohan Taori, Ishaan Gulrajani, Carlos Guestrin, Percy Liang, and Tatsunori B. Hashimoto. 2023b
Cited in the paper.
Closest in time.
Liger kernel: Efficient triton kernels for llm training
Pin-Lun Hsu, Yun Dai, Vignesh Kothapalli, Qingquan Song, Shao Tang, Siyu Zhu, Steven Shimizu, Shivam Sahni, Haowen Ning, and Yanning Chen. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
On the detection of reviewer-author collusion rings from paper bidding
Steven Jecmen, Nihar B. Shah, Fei Fang, and Leman Akoglu. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
What can natural language processing do for peer review?
Ilia Kuznetsov, Osama Mohammed Afzal, Koen Dercksen, Nils Dycke, Alexander Goldberg, Tom Hope, Dirk Hovy, Jonathan K. Kummerfeld, Anne Lauscher, Kevin Leyton-Brown, Sheng Lu, Mausam, Margot Mieskes, Aurélie Névéol, Danish Pruthi, Lizhen Qu, Roy Schwartz, Noah A. Smith, Thamar Solorio, Jingyan Wang, Xiaodan Zhu, Anna Rogers, Nihar B. Shah, and Iryna Gurevych. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Evaluating and enhancing large language models for novelty assessment in scholarly publications
Ethan Lin, Zhiyuan Peng, and Yi Fang. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
The AI scientist: Towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery
Chris Lu, Cong Lu, Robert Tjarko Lange, Jakob Foerster, Jeff Clune, and David Ha. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Are we there yet? revealing the risks of utilizing large language models in scholarly peer review
Rui Ye, Xianghe Pang, Jingyi Chai, Jiaao Chen, Zhenfei Yin, Zhen Xiang, Xiaowen Dong, Jing Shao, and Siheng Chen. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Automated peer reviewing in paper SEA: Standardization, evaluation, and analysis
Jianxiang Yu, Zichen Ding, Jiaqi Tan, Kangyang Luo, Zhenmin Weng, Chenghua Gong, Long Zeng, RenJing Cui, Chengcheng Han, Qiushi Sun, Zhiyong Wu, Yunshi Lan, and Xiang Li. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Is LLM a reliable reviewer? a comprehensive evaluation of LLM on automatic paper reviewing tasks
Ruiyang Zhou, Lu Chen, and Kai Yu. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.