mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI

arXiv 2601.16909 ↗First posted 23 Jan 2026cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper argues that AI-assisted peer review should be verification-first rather than review-mimicking. We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth, as the right objective for review tools. We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation: verification pressure, when claims outpace verification capacity, and signal shrinkage, when real improvements become hard to separate from noise. In a minimal model that mixes occasional high-fidelity checks with frequent proxy judgment, we derive an explicit coupling law and an incentive-collapse condition under which rational effort shifts from truth-seeking to proxy optimization, even when current decisions still appear reliable. These results motivate actions for tool builders and program chairs: deploy AI as an adversarial auditor that generates auditable verification artifacts and expands effective verification bandwidth, rather than as a score predictor that amplifies claim inflation.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jan 2026.

Builds on

13 of 33 references.

References · 13

  1. 2024Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviewscited by 160
  2. 2018A Dataset of Peer Reviews (PeerRead): Collection, Insights and NLP Applicationscited by 135
  3. 2018Categorizing Variants of Goodhart's Lawcited by 132
  4. 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 118
  5. 2024Usefulness of LLMs as an Author Checklist Assistant for Scientific Papers: NeurIPS'24 Experimentcited by 15
  6. 2025Beyond "Not Novel Enough": Enriching Scholarly Critique with LLM-Assisted Feedbackcited by 12
  7. 2025FLAWS: A Benchmark for Error Identification and Localization in Scientific Paperscited by 12
  8. 2024Problem Solving Through Human-AI Preference-Based Cooperationcited by 11
  9. 2024Evaluating the Predictive Capacity of ChatGPT for Academic Peer Review Outcomes Across Multiple Platformscited by 11
  10. 2025Automatic Reviewers Fail to Detect Faulty Reasoning in Research Papers: A New Counterfactual Evaluation Frameworkcited by 10
  11. 2026SciCoQA: Quality Assurance for Scientific Paper--Code Alignmentcited by 9
  12. 2024STRICTA: Structured Reasoning in Critical Text Assessment for Peer Review and Beyondcited by 5
1 more
  1. 2025Pre-review to Peer review: Pitfalls of Automating Reviews using Large Language Modelscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.