Skip to content

Can We Believe AI Peer Review?

Oct 2026 · 0 citations · 11 references
Computer Science

Abstract

As large language models become widely used in scientific review and manuscript revision, AI scores are increasingly serving as feedback for assessing paper quality and guiding edits. Yet whether a single AI score reliably reflects the reviewer's judgment, and whether revision gains based on that score are endorsed by other reviewers, remain understudied. Using 200 papers from ICLR 2025 and 2026 and approximately 14,000 AI reviews, we study score reliability, score-distribution estimation, and cross-model agreement on revision gains. Repeated reviews fluctuate even under identical conditions. Finer-grained scoring protocols reduce score variance but also systematically shift mean scores, while the gains assigned to manuscript revisions depend strongly on the reviewer.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Conference Open access Jun 2018

Gibson Env: Real-World Perception for Embodied Agents

This paper investigates developing real-world perception for active agents, proposes Gibson Environment for this purpose, and showcases a set of perceptual tasks learned therein.

F. Xia, Amir Zamir, Zhi-Yang He et al. · 1,069 citations · ⚡112
#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#artificial intelligence Open access Jul 2024

Gender, Race, and Intersectional Bias in Resume Screening via Language Model Retrieval

This work investigates the possibilities of using LLMs in a resume screening setting via a document retrieval framework that simulates job candidate selection and finds that the MTEs are biased, significantly favoring White-associated names in 85% of cases and female-associated names in only 11.1% of cases.

Kyra Wilson, Aylin Caliskan · 131 citations · ⚡8
#artificial intelligence Review Nov 2024

How to Build a Quantum Supercomputer: Scaling from Hundreds to Millions of Qubits

This work shows that orders of magnitude enhancement in performance could be obtained by a combination of hardware improvements and tight quantum-HPC integration and introduces high-performance architectures for quantum-probabilistic computing with custom-designed accelerators to tackle today's industry-scale classical...

Masoud Mohseni, Artur Scherer, K. Johnson et al. · 121 citations · ⚡9

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.