PEERAssist: Leveraging on Paper-Review Interactions to Predict Peer Review Decisions

被引:8
作者
Bharti, Prabhat Kumar [1 ]
Ranjan, Shashi [1 ]
Ghosal, Tirthankar [2 ]
Agrawal, Mayank [1 ]
Ekbal, Asif [1 ]
机构
[1] Indian Inst Technol Patna, Dept Comp Sci & Engn, Patna, Bihar, India
[2] Charles Univ Prague, Fac Math & Phys, Inst Formal & Appl Linguist, Prague, Czech Republic
来源
TOWARDS OPEN AND TRUSTWORTHY DIGITAL SOCIETIES, ICADL 2021 | 2021年 / 13133卷
关键词
Peer reviews; Decision prediction; Deep neural network; Cross attention;
D O I
10.1007/978-3-030-91669-5_33
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Peer review is the widely accepted method of research validation. However, with the deluge of research paper submissions accompanied with the rising number venues, the paper vetting system has come under a lot of stress. Problems like dearth of adequate reviewers, finding appropriate expert reviewers, maintaining the quality of the reviews are steadily and strongly surfacing up. To ease the peer review workload to some extent, here we investigate how an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered review system would look like. We leverage on the paperreview interaction to predict the decision in the reviewing process. We do not envisage an AI reviewing papers in the near-future, but seek to explore a human-AI collaboration in the decision-making process where the AI would leverage on the human-written reviews and paper full-text to predict the fate of the paper. The idea is to have an assistive decisionmaking tool for the chairs/editors to help them with an additional layer of confidence, especially with borderline and contrastive reviews. We use cross-attention between the review text and paper full-text to learn the interactions and henceforth generate the decision. We also make use of sentiment information encoded within peer-review texts to guide the outcome. Our initial results show encouraging performance on a dataset of paper+peer reviews curated from the ICLR openreviews. We make our codes and dataset (https://github.com/PrabhatkrBharti/PEERAssist) public for further explorations. We re-iterate that we are in an early stage of investigation and showcase our initial exciting results to justify our proposition.
引用
收藏
页码:421 / 435
页数:15
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
Beltagy I, 2019, 2019 CONFERENCE ON EMPIRICAL METHODS IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING AND THE 9TH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING (EMNLP-IJCNLP 2019), P3615
[2]   Reliability of reviewers' ratings when using public peer review: a case study [J].
Bornmann, L. ;
Daniel, H. -D. .
LEARNED PUBLISHING, 2010, 23 (02) :124-131
[3]  
Burstein J., 2019, P 2019 C N AM CHAPT, V1
[4]  
Cer D, 2018, CONFERENCE ON EMPIRICAL METHODS IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING (EMNLP 2018): PROCEEDINGS OF SYSTEM DEMONSTRATIONS, P169
[5]   Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis of Scientific Reviews [J].
Chakraborty, Souvic ;
Goyal, Pawan ;
Mukherjee, Animesh .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACM/IEEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES IN 2020, JCDL 2020, 2020, :207-216
[6]  
Charlin L., 2013, Matching System: An automated paper-reviewer assignment
[7]  
Feng Qiao, 2018, Web Information Systems and Applications. 15th International Conference, WISA 2018. Proceedings: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS 11242), P68, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-02934-0_7
[8]  
Ghosal T, 2019, 57TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS (ACL 2019), P1120
[9]   A Sentiment Augmented Deep Architecture to Predict Peer Review Outcomes [J].
Ghosal, Tirthankar ;
Verma, Rajeev ;
Ekbal, Asif ;
Bhattacharyya, Pushpak .
2019 ACM/IEEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES (JCDL 2019), 2019, :414-415
[10]   Is the Paper Within Scope? Are You Fishing in the Right Pond? Addressing the Appropriateness of a Manuscript to a Journal in the Peer Review Workflow [J].
Ghosal, Tirthankar ;
Sonam, Ravi ;
Ekbal, Asif ;
Saha, Sriparna ;
Bhattacharyya, Pushpak .
2019 ACM/IEEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES (JCDL 2019), 2019, :237-240