{"total":29,"rows":[{"id":"2410.04025","title":"IdeaSynth: Iterative Research Idea Development Through Evolving and Composing Idea Facets with Literature-Grounded Feedback","created":"2024-10-05","cited_by_count":42,"area":null},{"id":"2505.04966","title":"Position: The AI Conference Peer Review Crisis Demands Author Feedback and Reviewer Rewards","created":"2025-05-08","cited_by_count":34,"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":"2508.10795","title":"Beyond \"Not Novel Enough\": Enriching Scholarly Critique with LLM-Assisted Feedback","created":"2025-08-14","cited_by_count":12,"area":null},{"id":"2506.11343","title":"From Replication to Redesign: Exploring Pairwise Comparisons for LLM-Based Peer Review","created":"2025-06-12","cited_by_count":11,"area":null},{"id":"2509.13400","title":"Justice in Judgment: Unveiling (Hidden) Bias in LLM-assisted Peer Reviews","created":"2025-09-16","cited_by_count":11,"area":null},{"id":"2607.27191","title":"Can AI agents conduct open-ended AI research? Early evidence from two case studies","created":"2026-07-29","cited_by_count":10,"area":null},{"id":"2506.08134","title":"Position: The ML Community Must Build an AI-Augmented Peer-Review Ecosystem","created":"2025-06-09","cited_by_count":9,"area":null},{"id":"2408.13430","title":"The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review","created":"2024-08-24","cited_by_count":8,"area":null},{"id":"2604.28158","title":"Intern-Atlas: A Methodological Evolution Graph as Research Infrastructure for AI Scientists","created":"2026-04-30","cited_by_count":6,"area":null},{"id":"2605.20668","title":"On the limits and opportunities of AI reviewers: Reviewing the reviews of Nature-family papers with 45 expert scientists","created":"2026-05-20","cited_by_count":6,"area":null},{"id":"2410.04981","title":"On the Rigour of Scientific Writing: Criteria, Analysis, and Insights","created":"2024-10-07","cited_by_count":5,"area":null},{"id":"2410.09649","title":"Learning the Bitter Lesson: Empirical Evidence from 20 Years of CVPR Proceedings","created":"2024-10-12","cited_by_count":4,"area":null},{"id":"2510.02143","title":"How to Find Fantastic AI Papers: Self-Rankings as a Powerful Predictor of Scientific Impact Beyond Peer Review","created":"2025-10-02","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":"2605.26730","title":"PRISM: A Multi-Dimensional Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Peer Reviewers","created":"2026-05-26","cited_by_count":3,"area":null},{"id":"2502.00874","title":"Position: The Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Community Should Adopt a More Transparent and Regulated Peer Review Process","created":"2025-02-02","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2604.19998","title":"What Makes a Good AI Review? Concern-Level Diagnostics for AI Peer Review","created":"2026-04-21","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2605.27072","title":"E3: Issue-Level Backtesting for Automated Research Critique","created":"2026-05-26","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2607.27209","title":"Reviewer Scores Are Not Comparable Across Research Areas in ML Peer Review","created":"2026-04-30","cited_by_count":2,"area":null},{"id":"2507.08870","title":"GUIDE: Towards Scalable Advising for Research Ideas","created":"2025-07-09","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2601.15249","title":"Recommending Best Paper Awards for ML/AI Conferences via the Isotonic Mechanism","created":"2026-01-21","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2605.28897","title":"Review Arcade: On the Human Alignment and Gameability of LLM Reviews","created":"2026-05-27","cited_by_count":1,"area":null},{"id":"2601.15172","title":"Is Peer Review Really in Decline? Analyzing Review Quality across Venues and Time","created":"2026-01-21","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2606.15887","title":"Intelligence Is Not the Bottleneck: Validating an LLM First-Pass Manuscript Score Against Peer-Review Outcomes","created":"2026-06-14","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2606.22166","title":"Rebuttals Move Peer-Review Scores, but Initial-Review Structure Bounds the Movement","created":"2026-06-20","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2608.14571","title":"Position: Want Better ML Reviews? Stop Asking Nicely and Start Incentivizing with a Credit System","created":"2026-06-05","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2609.03943","title":"More Criticism Does Not Make a Better Review: EquiReview-R","created":"2026-09-03","cited_by_count":0,"area":null},{"id":"2610.06591","title":"The Review Lottery: Benchmarking an Observational Estimator of Peer-Review Noise (ICLR 2017-2025)","created":"2026-10-05","cited_by_count":0,"area":null}],"next_cursor":null}