Expert team finding for review assignment

Hongzhi Yin, B. Cui, Hua Lu, Lei Zhao
{"title":"Expert team finding for review assignment","authors":"Hongzhi Yin, B. Cui, Hua Lu, Lei Zhao","doi":"10.1109/TAAI.2016.7932314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The peer-review process is the most widely accepted standard for validating products of researchers within the scientific community. It is also adopted by funding agencies. An essential component of peer-review is to find a certain number of experts to review a research paper or a grant proposal. Previous work mainly focuses on finding experts with the necessary expertise relevant to the paper or proposal while ignoring the diversity in the selected reviewers, which potentially leads to the conflict of interest (COI). In this paper, we propose a novel and unified framework that takes three major key factors into account for reviewer assignment: importance, diversity and expertise coverage of a group of reviewers. Our framework selects a panel of reviewers that not only cover all topics of a submission but also reduce various potential COIs. The proposed framework effectively integrates probabilistic topic model and activation spread model in the presence of a social network of researchers. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to study the diversity of reviewers and leverage its effect in the reviewer assignment. We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the performance of our proposed framework for reviewer assignment. The experimental results show that our approach is very effective in finding panels of relevant, authoritative and diverse reviewers for given submissions to review.","PeriodicalId":159858,"journal":{"name":"2016 Conference on Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence (TAAI)","volume":"225 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 Conference on Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence (TAAI)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TAAI.2016.7932314","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The peer-review process is the most widely accepted standard for validating products of researchers within the scientific community. It is also adopted by funding agencies. An essential component of peer-review is to find a certain number of experts to review a research paper or a grant proposal. Previous work mainly focuses on finding experts with the necessary expertise relevant to the paper or proposal while ignoring the diversity in the selected reviewers, which potentially leads to the conflict of interest (COI). In this paper, we propose a novel and unified framework that takes three major key factors into account for reviewer assignment: importance, diversity and expertise coverage of a group of reviewers. Our framework selects a panel of reviewers that not only cover all topics of a submission but also reduce various potential COIs. The proposed framework effectively integrates probabilistic topic model and activation spread model in the presence of a social network of researchers. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to study the diversity of reviewers and leverage its effect in the reviewer assignment. We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the performance of our proposed framework for reviewer assignment. The experimental results show that our approach is very effective in finding panels of relevant, authoritative and diverse reviewers for given submissions to review.
为评审任务寻找专家团队
同行评审过程是科学界最广泛接受的验证研究人员产品的标准。它也被资助机构采用。同行评议的一个重要组成部分是找到一定数量的专家来审查一篇研究论文或一份拨款提案。以前的工作主要集中在寻找与论文或提案相关的必要专业知识的专家,而忽略了所选审稿人的多样性,这可能导致利益冲突(COI)。在本文中,我们提出了一个新的统一框架,该框架考虑了审稿人分配的三个主要关键因素:审稿人群体的重要性、多样性和专业知识覆盖率。我们的框架选择了一个评审者小组,不仅涵盖了提交的所有主题,而且还减少了各种潜在的coi。该框架在研究者的社会网络中有效地整合了概率话题模型和激活传播模型。据我们所知,这是第一个研究审稿人多样性并利用其在审稿人分配中的作用的工作。我们进行了大量的实验来评估我们提出的审稿人分配框架的性能。实验结果表明,我们的方法可以非常有效地找到相关的、权威的、多样化的审稿人小组来审查给定的提交。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信