Controversy has erupted after 21% of manuscript reviews for an international AI conference were found to be generated by artificial intelligence.
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.
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.
The AI Trust Gap: 82% Are Skeptical, Yet Only 8% Always Check Sources
Original Exploding Topics survey data explores public sentiment on AI Overviews and AI-generated content, highlighting trust, skepticism, and shifting content consumption habits.
More Versus Better: Artificial Intelligence, Incentives, and the Emerging Crisis in Peer Review | Organization Science
As the AI Task Force for Organization Science, we provide an early account of artificial intelligence’s (AI) impact on both submissions and reviews at a major academic journal. Submission volume ha...
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.
AI-assisted Reviewing is Necessary and Should be Open
Peer review is facing a death spiral. AI production tools are speeding it up. AI-assisted reviewing is necessary and should be open.
AI-assisted Reviewing is Necessary and Should be Open
Peer review is facing a death spiral. AI production tools are speeding it up. AI-assisted reviewing is necessary and should be open.
AI-powered Literature Review & Synthesis
Recording from my workshop last week on smarter literature review with AI
AI, peer review and the human activity of science
When researchers cede their scientific judgement to machines, we lose something important.
How AI slop is causing a crisis in computer science
Preprint repositories and conference organizers are having to counter a tide of ‘AI slop’ submissions.
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
Peer review is facing a death spiral, and AI production tools are speeding it up. AI-assisted reviewing is necessary and should be open. We built OpenAIReview: open AI reviewing for everyone, for the cost of a coffee. openaireview.github.io/blog.html 🧵
AI-assisted Reviewing is Necessary and Should be Open
openaireview.github.ioAbsolutely 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
