Peer review relies upon reciprocity - I'll check your work, knowing that you'd do the same for me. Your investment in writing deserves my investment in reading. However AI generated theory papers are really testing my patience, and my peer reviewed faith. #ICLR
Oct 20, 2026 at 2:18 AM
Guest Post — Now is the Time for AI in Peer Review, and Publishing Policies Need to Recognize This - The Scholarly Kitchen
Today's post asks us to acknowledge the role of AI in peer review and ensure practical guidance and policies that help scholars respond with consistency and confidence.
How do authors want to use AI for review?
A survey of researchers who compared AI-generated scientific reviews with journal-agnostic human peer review reveals that they overwhelmingly prefer using AI as a self-checking tool before submission rather than as a replacement for human reviewers. It encourages an “author-centric” model in which AI helps researchers improve their manuscripts before they are reviewed by their peers.
Exploring AI’s growing role in scientific peer review
Stanford computer scientist James Zou discusses AI’s strengths at spotting errors and limitations in judging research significance.
AI’s Growing Role as Scientific Peer Reviewer | Stanford HAI
Stanford computer scientist James Zou is exploring how AI can accelerate scientific research and peer review. His finding: AI excels at spotting gaps, but judgment calls still need humans.
Peer review is overwhelmed—can it survive in the AI era?
As research and AI-assisted papers surge, volunteer reviewers struggle to keep up.
AI and the Future of Science
AI reviewers are here — we are not ready
Nature - Artificial intelligence promises rapid and polite feedback on papers — but we must first review the reviewer.
The Published Voice: Whose Voice Are We Really Reading? - The Scholarly Kitchen
What happens then to “author voice,” which has always been an important consideration to authors and reviewers alike, if AI is helping researchers with their writing?
Reviewer Commitment to Authorial Accountability
A commitment by peer reviewers to decline review invitations when a submitted paper's prose appears to be predominantly AI-generated.
Adil on Twitter / X
being assigned to review AI generated slop papers is very frustrating. the way this is supposed to work is that first you take the time to write something and then i take the time to read it. if you don't do the first part then i shouldn't have to do the second part.— Adil (@adilsoubki) August 26, 2026
(PDF) Peer Reviewers Should be Allowed to Upload Manuscripts to AI
PDF | Publishers bar peer reviewers-but not authors or editors-from feeding manuscripts to AI. Cited confidentiality concerns don't survive scrutiny.... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
Absolutely incredible figure from this journal article arguing that AI should be accepted into the publication and peer review process. #MedSky doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-1180
Absolutely incredible figure from this journal article arguing that AI should be accepted into the publication and peer review process. #MedSky doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-1180
