{"total":43,"rows":[{"id":"2306.00622","title":"ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewing","created":"2023-06-01","cited_by_count":122,"area":null},{"id":"2412.11948","title":"OpenReviewer: A Specialized Large Language Model for Generating Critical Scientific Paper Reviews","created":"2024-12-16","cited_by_count":65,"area":null},{"id":"2102.00176","title":"Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing?","created":"2021-01-30","cited_by_count":63,"area":null},{"id":"2406.16253","title":"LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewing","created":"2024-06-24","cited_by_count":62,"area":null},{"id":"2204.10805","title":"Revise and Resubmit: An Intertextual Model of Text-based Collaboration in Peer Review","created":"2022-04-22","cited_by_count":37,"area":null},{"id":"2405.20477","title":"Automated Focused Feedback Generation for Scientific Writing Assistance","created":"2024-05-30","cited_by_count":33,"area":null},{"id":"2407.12857","title":"Automated Peer Reviewing in Paper SEA: Standardization, Evaluation, and Analysis","created":"2024-07-09","cited_by_count":33,"area":null},{"id":"2211.06398","title":"Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach","created":"2022-11-07","cited_by_count":23,"area":null},{"id":"2111.07533","title":"Automated scholarly paper review: Concepts, technologies, and challenges","created":"2021-11-15","cited_by_count":21,"area":null},{"id":"2108.00308","title":"Human Evaluation of Creative NLG Systems: An Interdisciplinary Survey on Recent Papers","created":"2021-07-31","cited_by_count":18,"area":null},{"id":"2202.02013","title":"A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publications","created":"2022-02-04","cited_by_count":18,"area":null},{"id":"2509.04484","title":"The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors","created":"2025-08-31","cited_by_count":16,"area":null},{"id":"2507.23276","title":"How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?","created":"2025-07-31","cited_by_count":15,"area":null},{"id":"2305.14647","title":"Scientific Opinion Summarization: Paper Meta-review Generation Dataset, Methods, and Evaluation","created":"2023-05-24","cited_by_count":14,"area":null},{"id":"2102.11497","title":"Controllable and Diverse Text Generation in E-commerce","created":"2021-02-23","cited_by_count":13,"area":null},{"id":"2509.19326","title":"Unveiling the Merits and Defects of LLMs in Automatic Review Generation for Scientific Papers","created":"2025-09-13","cited_by_count":12,"area":null},{"id":"2511.15462","title":"Insights from the ICLR Peer Review and Rebuttal Process","created":"2025-11-19","cited_by_count":11,"area":null},{"id":"2303.14337","title":"SmartBook: AI-Assisted Situation Report Generation for Intelligence Analysts","created":"2023-03-25","cited_by_count":9,"area":null},{"id":"2401.16578","title":"Leveraging Professional Radiologists' Expertise to Enhance LLMs' Evaluation for Radiology Reports","created":"2024-01-29","cited_by_count":7,"area":null},{"id":"2604.11543","title":"NovBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Academic Paper Novelty Assessment","created":"2026-04-13","cited_by_count":7,"area":null},{"id":"2604.27924","title":"Can AI Be a Good Peer Reviewer? A Survey of Peer Review Process, Evaluation, and the Future","created":"2026-04-30","cited_by_count":6,"area":null},{"id":"2508.11779","title":"A Multi-Task Evaluation of LLMs' Processing of Academic Text Input","created":"2025-08-15","cited_by_count":5,"area":null},{"id":"2105.14473","title":"Determining the Credibility of Science Communication","created":"2021-05-30","cited_by_count":4,"area":null},{"id":"2202.13610","title":"Did AI get more negative recently?","created":"2022-02-28","cited_by_count":4,"area":null},{"id":"2504.06910","title":"Identifying Aspects in Peer Reviews","created":"2025-04-09","cited_by_count":4,"area":null},{"id":"2512.09443","title":"A Human-AI Collaborative Workflow for Mathematical Discovery: A Case Study in Grover-Compatible Riemannian Optimization","created":"2025-12-10","cited_by_count":4,"area":null},{"id":"2601.04350","title":"RIGOURATE: Quantifying Scientific Exaggeration with Evidence-Aligned Claim Evaluation","created":"2026-01-07","cited_by_count":3,"area":null},{"id":"2412.00281","title":"Streamlining the review process: AI-generated annotations in research manuscripts","created":"2024-11-29","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2604.23593","title":"When AI reviews science: Can we trust the referee?","created":"2026-04-26","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2605.06901","title":"Reflections and New Directions for Human-Centered Large Language Models","created":"2026-05-07","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2312.03497","title":"Speculative Exploration on the Concept of Artificial Agents Conducting Autonomous Research","created":"2023-12-06","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2410.04202","title":"Deep Transfer Learning Based Peer Review Aggregation and Meta-review Generation for Scientific Articles","created":"2024-10-05","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2410.18475","title":"Gene-Metabolite Association Prediction with Interactive Knowledge Transfer Enhanced Graph for Metabolite Production","created":"2024-10-24","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2507.08870","title":"GUIDE: Towards Scalable Advising for Research Ideas","created":"2025-07-09","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2602.13817","title":"What happens when reviewers receive AI feedback in their reviews?","created":"2026-02-14","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2604.14162","title":"Decoupling Scores and Text: The Politeness Principle in Peer Review","created":"2026-03-23","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2604.19578","title":"Impact of large language models on peer review opinions from a fine-grained perspective: Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI","created":"2026-04-21","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2606.21904","title":"Which Review Aspect Has a Greater Impact on the Duration of Open Peer Review in Multiple Rounds? -- Evidence from Nature Communications","created":"2026-06-20","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2607.26066","title":"Do Methods Support the Claims? Intra-Paper Verification for Peer Review","created":"2026-06-21","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2603.20214","title":"Beyond Detection: Governing GenAI in Academic Peer Review as a Sociotechnical Challenge","created":"2026-03-02","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2606.23233","title":"Judgment-Grounded Expansion for Peer Review Generation","created":"2026-06-22","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2609.36617","title":"Generating Edit-Inducing Questions for AI Research Manuscripts","created":"2026-09-29","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2609.39027","title":"A Missing Piece for Trustworthy AI Reviewers: From Benchmarking Rhetorical Robustness to SciCore Review","created":"2026-09-30","cited_by_count":0,"area":null}],"next_cursor":null}