Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review

IF 2.2 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall
{"title":"Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review","authors":"Kayvan Kousha,&nbsp;Mike Thelwall","doi":"10.1002/leap.1570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Technology is being developed to support the peer review processes of journals, conferences, funders, universities, and national research evaluations. This literature and software summary discusses the partial or complete automation of several publishing-related tasks: suggesting appropriate journals for an article, providing quality control for submitted papers, finding suitable reviewers for submitted papers or grant proposals, reviewing, and review evaluation. It also discusses attempts to estimate article quality from peer review text and scores as well as from post-publication scores but not from bibliometric data. The literature and existing examples of working technology show that automation is useful for helping to find reviewers and there is good evidence that it can sometimes help with initial quality control of submitted manuscripts. Much other software supporting publishing and editorial work exists and is being used, but without published academic evaluations of its efficacy. The value of artificial intelligence (AI) to support reviewing has not been clearly demonstrated yet, however. Finally, whilst peer review text and scores can theoretically have value for post-publication research assessment, it is not yet widely enough available to be a practical evidence source for systematic automation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51636,"journal":{"name":"Learned Publishing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/leap.1570","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learned Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1570","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Technology is being developed to support the peer review processes of journals, conferences, funders, universities, and national research evaluations. This literature and software summary discusses the partial or complete automation of several publishing-related tasks: suggesting appropriate journals for an article, providing quality control for submitted papers, finding suitable reviewers for submitted papers or grant proposals, reviewing, and review evaluation. It also discusses attempts to estimate article quality from peer review text and scores as well as from post-publication scores but not from bibliometric data. The literature and existing examples of working technology show that automation is useful for helping to find reviewers and there is good evidence that it can sometimes help with initial quality control of submitted manuscripts. Much other software supporting publishing and editorial work exists and is being used, but without published academic evaluations of its efficacy. The value of artificial intelligence (AI) to support reviewing has not been clearly demonstrated yet, however. Finally, whilst peer review text and scores can theoretically have value for post-publication research assessment, it is not yet widely enough available to be a practical evidence source for systematic automation.

人工智能支持出版和同行评审:综述
正在开发技术,以支持期刊、会议、资助者、大学和国家研究评估的同行评审过程。本文献和软件摘要讨论了几个与出版相关的任务的部分或完全自动化:为文章推荐合适的期刊,为提交的论文提供质量控制,为提交的论文或拨款提案寻找合适的审稿人,审查和审查评估。它还讨论了从同行评议文本和分数以及出版后分数估计文章质量的尝试,但不包括文献计量数据。文献和现有的工作技术实例表明,自动化对于帮助找到审稿人是有用的,并且有很好的证据表明,它有时可以帮助对提交的手稿进行初步的质量控制。许多其他支持出版和编辑工作的软件存在并且正在使用,但没有发表其有效性的学术评估。但是,人工智能(AI)支持审查的价值还没有得到明确的证明。最后,虽然同行评议文本和分数在理论上对发表后的研究评估有价值,但它还不够广泛,不足以成为系统自动化的实际证据来源。
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
Learned Publishing
Learned Publishing INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
17.90%
发文量
72
×
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