Saved in:
| Main Author: | Hug, Sven E. |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.04569 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Similar Items
Reforming research funding: Combining editorial preregistration with grant peer review
by: Bornmann, Lutz, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Bornmann, Lutz, et al.
Published: (2025)
Demanding peer review is associated with higher impact in published science
by: Jiang, Huihuang, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Jiang, Huihuang, et al.
Published: (2026)
Are Digital Humanities really committed to open? An exploratory study on the availability of methodological workflows and open peer review practices
by: Peroni, Silvio
Published: (2026)
by: Peroni, Silvio
Published: (2026)
Beyond journals and peer review: towards a more flexible ecosystem for scholarly communication
by: Wood, Michael
Published: (2013)
by: Wood, Michael
Published: (2013)
Can ChatGPT evaluate research environments? Evidence from REF2021
by: Kousha, Kayvan, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Kousha, Kayvan, et al.
Published: (2025)
You can just review things: A digital ethnography of informal peer review
by: Patel, Jay, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Patel, Jay, et al.
Published: (2026)
How Visa-Free Policies Fuel International Research Collaboration: Evidence from China
by: Cai, Songlin, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Cai, Songlin, et al.
Published: (2025)
Impact of large language models on peer review opinions from a fine-grained perspective: Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI
by: Wu, Wenqing, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Wu, Wenqing, et al.
Published: (2026)
Traditional statistical representations outperform generative AI in identifying expert peer reviewers
by: Olivo, Vicente Amado, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Olivo, Vicente Amado, et al.
Published: (2026)
GotFunding: A grant recommendation system based on scientific articles
by: Zeng, Tong, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Zeng, Tong, et al.
Published: (2024)
Auditing automated research assessment: an interpretable machine learning approach to validate funding criteria
by: Gouveia, Rafael P., et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Gouveia, Rafael P., et al.
Published: (2026)
FMMD: A multimodal open peer review dataset based on F1000Research
by: Zhuang, Zhenzhen, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Zhuang, Zhenzhen, et al.
Published: (2026)
'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' Who will watch the watchmen? On Detecting AI-generated peer-reviews
by: Kumar, Sandeep, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Kumar, Sandeep, et al.
Published: (2024)
Science cited in policy documents: Evidence from the Overton database
by: Fang, Zhichao, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Fang, Zhichao, et al.
Published: (2024)
Which stylistic features fool ChatGPT research evaluations?
by: Kousha, Kayvan, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Kousha, Kayvan, et al.
Published: (2026)
Research evaluation with ChatGPT: Is it age, country, length, or field biased?
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2024)
How good is the h-index?
by: Borji, Ali
Published: (2025)
by: Borji, Ali
Published: (2025)
Trends in Practical Student Peer-review
by: Purchase, Helen C., et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Purchase, Helen C., et al.
Published: (2024)
Interactive Evidence Maps for Visualizing and Understanding Systematic Reviews
by: Mallavarapu, Aditi, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Mallavarapu, Aditi, et al.
Published: (2026)
Large language models for post-publication research evaluation: Evidence from expert recommendations and citation indicators
by: Wu, Mengjia, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Wu, Mengjia, et al.
Published: (2026)
Research impact evaluation based on effective authorship contribution sensitivity: h-leadership index
by: Jain, Hardik A., et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Jain, Hardik A., et al.
Published: (2025)
Dynamic disruption index across citation and cited references windows: Recommendations for thresholds in research evaluation
by: Chen, Hongkan, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Chen, Hongkan, et al.
Published: (2025)
Cost for research -- how cost data of research can be included in open metadata to be reused and evaluated
by: Bartlewski, Julia, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Bartlewski, Julia, et al.
Published: (2025)
Research quality evaluation by AI in the era of Large Language Models: Advantages, disadvantages, and systemic effects
by: Thelwall, Mike
Published: (2025)
by: Thelwall, Mike
Published: (2025)
Have we reached the beginning of the end for review papers?
by: Smyth, Barry, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Smyth, Barry, et al.
Published: (2025)
APC waivers and Ukraine's publishing output in Gold OA journals: Evidence from five commercial publishers
by: Nazarovets, Serhii
Published: (2025)
by: Nazarovets, Serhii
Published: (2025)
In which fields can ChatGPT detect journal article quality? An evaluation of REF2021 results
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2024)
The existence of stealth corrections in scientific literature -- a threat to scientific integrity
by: Aquarius, Rene, et al.
Published: (2024)
by: Aquarius, Rene, et al.
Published: (2024)
Recall, Risk, and Governance in Automated Proposal Screening for Research Funding: Evidence from a National Funding Programme
by: Nagarajappa, Chandan G., et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Nagarajappa, Chandan G., et al.
Published: (2026)
How open are hybrid journals included in transformative agreements?
by: Jahn, Najko
Published: (2024)
by: Jahn, Najko
Published: (2024)
Success in Science: How Global Prestige Organizes Careers
by: Kwiek, Marek, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Kwiek, Marek, et al.
Published: (2026)
Can ChatGPT be a good follower of academic paradigms? Research quality evaluations in conflicting areas of sociology
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Thelwall, Mike, et al.
Published: (2025)
COARA will not save science from the tyranny of administrative evaluation
by: Baccini, Alberto
Published: (2024)
by: Baccini, Alberto
Published: (2024)
Changes in Manuscript Length, Research Team Size, and International Collaboration in the Post-2022 Period: Evidence from PLOS ONE
by: Ben-Zion, Yossi, et al.
Published: (2026)
by: Ben-Zion, Yossi, et al.
Published: (2026)
Cross-lingual Comparison of Research Funding Projects with Multilingual Sentence-BERT: Evidence from KAKENHI, NIH, NSF, and UKRI
by: Kimura-Ida, Miki
Published: (2026)
by: Kimura-Ida, Miki
Published: (2026)
A smack of all neighbouring languages: How multilingual is scholarly communication?
by: Pradier, Carolina, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Pradier, Carolina, et al.
Published: (2025)
How an AI-ready National Data Library would help UK science
by: Meroño-Peñuela, Albert, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Meroño-Peñuela, Albert, et al.
Published: (2025)
How to build an Open Science Monitor based on publications? A French perspective
by: Bracco, Laetitia, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Bracco, Laetitia, et al.
Published: (2025)
How are research data referenced? The use case of the research data repository RADAR
by: Strecker, Dorothea, et al.
Published: (2025)
by: Strecker, Dorothea, et al.
Published: (2025)
How permanent are metadata for research data? Understanding changes in DataCite metadata
by: Strecker, Dorothea
Published: (2024)
by: Strecker, Dorothea
Published: (2024)
Similar Items
-
Reforming research funding: Combining editorial preregistration with grant peer review
by: Bornmann, Lutz, et al.
Published: (2025) -
Demanding peer review is associated with higher impact in published science
by: Jiang, Huihuang, et al.
Published: (2026) -
Are Digital Humanities really committed to open? An exploratory study on the availability of methodological workflows and open peer review practices
by: Peroni, Silvio
Published: (2026) -
Beyond journals and peer review: towards a more flexible ecosystem for scholarly communication
by: Wood, Michael
Published: (2013) -
Can ChatGPT evaluate research environments? Evidence from REF2021
by: Kousha, Kayvan, et al.
Published: (2025)