arXiv (All)
open access
Can We Believe AI Peer Review?
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 sc
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
- The Ability of Generative Artificial Intelligence to Evaluate the Quality of Scholarly Output#1360410
- Large Language Model Turnover Undermines Screening for Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Scientific Writing#1248879
- Searching smarter, not harder: leveraging AI to enhance literature searches for theory-driven reviews-A methodological case study.#756
- Generating Interesting Scientific Ideas using Knowledge Graphs and LLMs: Evaluations with 100 Research Group Leaders#1077821
- LitReview Arena: Evaluating Literature Review Agents with Battle-Style Peer Review Platform#1129367
Record · ID 1345162
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