arXiv (All)
open access
Scoring Grant Applications with Large Language Models
Purpose: Assessing grant applications is time-consuming and difficult, adding to the overall burden of academic peer review. Whilst funders are exploring whether AI can help, there is no published research into the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for scoring contemporary grants. Design/meth
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- SciLitBench: Benchmark and Design Principles for LLM-Powered Systematic Literature Reviews#972566
- Do large language models scrutinise what they review? A multimodal audit of scoring calibration, error detection, and author-identity effects#792877
- Do large language models scrutinise what they review? A multimodal audit of scoring calibration, error detection, and author-identity effects#788873
- Large language models show promising performance for some systematic review tasks but call for cautious implementation: a systematic review#364033
- A patient-derived benchmark for evaluating large language models in connective tissue diseases: blinded multi-stakeholder assessment and guideline comparison.#371711
Record · ID 1051820
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive