A Novice-Reviewer Experiment to Address Scarcity of Qualified Reviewers in Large Conferences
Ivan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh, Hal Daumé III
摘要
Conference peer review constitutes a human-computation process whose importance cannot be overstated: not only it identifies the best submissions for acceptance, but, ultimately, it impacts the future of the whole research area by promoting some ideas and restraining others. A surge in the number of submissions received by leading AI conferences has challenged the sustainability of the review process by increasing the burden on the pool of qualified reviewers which is growing at a much slower rate. In this work, we consider the problem of reviewer recruiting with a focus on the scarcity of qualified reviewers in large conferences. Specifically, we design a procedure for (i) recruiting reviewers from the population not typically covered by major conferences and (ii) guiding them through the reviewing pipeline. In conjunction with the ICML 2020 --- a large, top-tier machine learning conference --- we recruit a small set of reviewers through our procedure and compare their performance with the general population of ICML reviewers. Our experiment reveals that a combination of the recruiting and guiding mechanisms allows for a principled enhancement of the reviewer pool and results in reviews of superior quality compared to the conventional pool of reviews as evaluated by senior members of the program committee (meta-reviewers).
问问这篇 Paper
智能体会读完全文。
Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了每一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。
引用它的顶会 Paper5
- You Are the Best Reviewer of Your Own Papers: An Owner-Assisted Scoring MechanismWeijie J. SuNeurIPS 2021 · 被引用 32 次
- Counterfactual Evaluation of Peer-Review Assignment PoliciesMartin Saveski, Steven Jecmen, Nihar B. Shah, Johan UganderNeurIPS 2023 · 被引用 19 次
- Prior and Prejudice: The Novice Reviewers' Bias against Resubmissions in Conference Peer ReviewIvan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh, Hal Daumé IIICSCW 2021 · 被引用 17 次
- On Truthful Item-Acquiring Mechanisms for Reward MaximizationLiang Shan, Shuo Zhang, Jie Zhang, Zihe WangWWW 2024
- The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for AuthorsAbdelrahman Sadallah, Tim Baumgärtner, Iryna Gurevych, Ted BriscoeEMNLP 2025
它引用的顶会 Paper3
- Mitigating Manipulation in Peer Review via Randomized Reviewer AssignmentsSteven Jecmen, Hanrui Zhang, Ryan Liu, Nihar B. Shah 等NeurIPS 2020 · 被引用 90 次
- Prior and Prejudice: The Novice Reviewers' Bias against Resubmissions in Conference Peer ReviewIvan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh, Hal Daumé IIICSCW 2021 · 被引用 17 次
- HirePeer: Impartial Peer-Assessed Hiring at Scale in Expert Crowdsourcing MarketsYasmine Kotturi, Anson Kahng, Ariel D. Procaccia, Chinmay KulkarniAAAI 2020 · 被引用 15 次
相关 Paper
- Peer Grading the Peer Reviews: A Dual-Role Approach for Lightening the Scholarly Paper Review ProcessInes Arous, Jie Yang, Mourad Khayati, Philippe Cudré-MaurouxWWW 2021 · 被引用 14 次
- Group Fairness in Peer ReviewHaris Aziz, Evi Micha, Nisarg ShahNeurIPS 2023 · 被引用 15 次
- A Needle in a Haystack: An Analysis of High-Agreement Workers on MTurk for SummarizationLining Zhang, Simon Mille, Yufang Hou, Daniel Deutsch 等ACL 2023 · 被引用 6 次
- The AI Review Lottery: Widespread AI-Assisted Peer Reviews Boost Paper Scores and Acceptance RatesGiuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Tim R. Davidson, Veniamin Veselovsky 等CSCW 2025 · 被引用 10 次
- CoCoReviewBench: A Completeness- and Correctness-Oriented Benchmark for AI ReviewersHexuan Deng, Xiaopeng Ke, Yichen Li, Ruina Hu 等ICML 2026
