Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
The peer review process in major artificial intelligence (AI) conferences faces unprecedented challenges with the surge of paper submissions (exceeding 10,000 submissions per venue), accompanied by growing concerns over review quality and reviewer responsibility.
Does my rebuttal matter? insights from a major NLP conference
Gao, Y., Eger, S., Kuznetsov, I., Gurevych, I., and Miyao, Y · 1903
Earlier work this paper cites.
Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance
Ross, J. S., Gross, C. P., Desai, M. M., Hong, Y., Grant, A. O., Daniels, S. R., Hachinski, V. C., Gibbons, R. J., Gardner, T. J., and Krumholz, H. M · 2006
Earlier work this paper cites.
What do we know about the h index?
Bornmann, L. and Daniel, H.-D · 2007
Earlier work this paper cites.
Expertise modeling for matching papers with reviewers
Mimno, D. and McCallum, A · 2007
Earlier work this paper cites.
Relative status of journal and conference publications in computer science
Freyne, J., Coyle, L., Smyth, B., and Cunningham, P · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Effective matrices, decision frames, and cooperation in volunteer dilemmas: A theoretical perspective on academic peer review
Northcraft, G. B. and Tenbrunsel, A. E · 2011
Earlier work this paper cites.
How economics shapes science
Stephan, P · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Intended and unintended consequences of a publish-or-perish culture: A worldwide survey
Van Dalen, H. P. and Henkens, K · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers
Mulligan, A., Hall, L., and Raphael, E · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
On the inaccuracy of numerical ratings: dealing with biased opinions in social networks
Centeno, R., Hermoso, R., and Fasli, M · 2015
Earlier work this paper cites.
Digital badges in education
Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., and Knight, E · 2015
Earlier work this paper cites.
A brief survey on peer review in scholarly communication
Nicholson, J. and Alperin, J. P · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
Rewarding reviewers–sense or sensibility? a wiley study explained
Warne, V · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
Educational functions and design of badge systems: A conceptual literature review
Facey-Shaw, L., Specht, M., Van Rosmalen, P., Brner, D., and Bartley-Bryan, J · 2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
Avoiding a tragedy of the commons in the peer review process
Sculley, D., Snoek, J., and Wiltschko, A · 2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
Improving the peer review process: a proposed market system
Frijters, P. and Torgler, B · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Author-based analysis of conference versus journal publication in computer science
Kim, J · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Instilling purpose and value in the implementation of digital badges in higher education
Stefaniak, J. and Carey, K · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Potential biases in big data: Omitted voices on social media
Hargittai, E · 2020
Cited alongside, same era.
What can we do to improve peer review in nlp?
Rogers, A. and Augenstein, I · 2020
Cited alongside, same era.
An open review of openreview: A critical analysis of the machine learning conference review process
Tran, D., Valtchanov, A., Ganapathy, K., Feng, R., Slud, E., Goldblum, M., and Goldstein, T · 2020
Cited alongside, same era.
Inconsistency in conference peer review: Revisiting the 2014 neurips experiment
Reviewergpt? an exploratory study on using large language models for paper reviewing
Liu, R. and Shah, N. B · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
Peer prediction for peer review: designing a marketplace for ideas
Ugarov, A · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
An isotonic mechanism for overlapping ownership
Wu, J., Xu, H., Guo, Y., and Su, W · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
On the detection of reviewer-author collusion rings from paper bidding
Jecmen, S., Shah, N. B., Fang, F., and Akoglu, L · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Cortes, C. and Lawrence, N. D · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Some ethical issues in the review process of machine learning conferences
Russo, A · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Auctions and peer prediction for academic peer review
Srinivasan, S. and Morgenstern, J · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
You are the best reviewer of your own papers: An owner-assisted scoring mechanism
Su, W · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Making paper reviewing robust to bid manipulation attacks
Wu, R., Guo, C., Wu, F., Kidambi, R., Van Der Maaten, L., and Weinberger, K · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Challenges, experiments, and computational solutions in peer review
Shah, N. B · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
A system-level analysis of conference peer review
Zhang, Y., Yu, F.-Y., Schoenebeck, G., and Kempe, D · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Kuznetsov, I., Afzal, O. M., Dercksen, K., Dycke, N., Goldberg, A., Hope, T., Hovy, D., Kummerfeld, J. K., Lauscher, A., Leyton-Brown, K., et al · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
The ai scientist: Towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery
Lu, C., Lu, C., Lange, R. T., Foerster, J., Clune, J., and Ha, D · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Artificial intelligence index report 2024, 2024
Maslej, N., Fattorini, L., Perrault, R., Parli, V., Reuel, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Etchemendy, J., Ligett, K., Lyons, T., Manyika, J., Niebles, J. C., Shoham, Y., Wald, R., and Clark, J · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Analysis of the icml 2023 ranking data: Can authors’ opinions of their own papers assist peer review in machine learning?
Su, B., Zhang, J., Collina, N., Yan, Y., Li, D., Cho, K., Fan, J., Roth, A., and Su, W. J · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Ai-driven review systems: evaluating llms in scalable and bias-aware academic reviews
Tyser, K., Segev, B., Longhitano, G., Zhang, X.-Y., Meeks, Z., Lee, J., Garg, U., Belsten, N., Shporer, A., Udell, M., et al · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Large language models for simultaneous named entity extraction and spelling correction
Whittaker, E. and Kitagishi, I · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
A truth serum for eliciting self-evaluations in scientific reviews
Wu, J., Xu, H., Guo, Y., and Su, W · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Neurips 2024 experiment on improving the paper-reviewer assignment
Xu, Y. E., Fang, F., Tomczak, J., Zhang, C., Xue, Z. S., Paquet, U., and Belgrave, D · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Are we there yet? revealing the risks of utilizing large language models in scholarly peer review
Ye, R., Pang, X., Chai, J., Chen, J., Yin, Z., Xiang, Z., Dong, X., Shao, J., and Chen, S · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Is llm a reliable reviewer? a comprehensive evaluation of llm on automatic paper reviewing tasks
Zhou, R., Chen, L., and Yu, K · 2024
Later among the works it cites.
Peer reviews of peer reviews: A randomized controlled trial and other experiments
Goldberg, A., Stelmakh, I., Cho, K., Oh, A., Agarwal, A., Belgrave, D., and Shah, N. B · 2025
Closest in time.