arXiv (All)
open access
Beyond Human-Likeness: Mapping the Scientific Critique Profiles of LLMs and Human Reviewers
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly discussed as tools for peer review, but their value is often assessed through human-likeness, perceived usefulness, or textual overlap with reviewer comments. This study shifts attention from whether LLMs resemble human reviewers to what functions of sci
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
- CALIBRATED AI REVIEWER: AN ALGORITHM FOR COMPARING SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS WITH HIGH AND LOW ENTRY BARRIERS#141283
- Abstention vs. Hallucination: Benchmarking LLM Source Attribution for Scientific Citations#1123905
- Frontier Lag: A Bibliometric Audit of Capability Misrepresentation in Academic AI Evaluation#1077886
- Convergence Point: A Unified Explanatory Principle for Response Uncertainty in AI Language Models#237266
- The Limits of Simulated Societies: How Post-Training and Survey Fine-Tuning Erase Cross-Cultural Variance#1061393
Record · ID 822314
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