SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Personal experience with AI-generated peer reviews: a case study
16 references·0 citing·44 second hop
Personal experience with AI-generated peer reviews: a case study (2025)Personal experience with AI-generated pee…Exploring the Impact of Generative AI on Peer Review: Insights from Journal Reviewers (2025)Exploring the Impact of Gener…Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals (2024)Use of Artificial Intelligenc…Use of artificial intelligence and the future of peer review (2024)Use of artificial intelligenc…The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool (2024)The ethics of using artificia…Generative artificial intelligence is infiltrating peer review process (2024)Generative artificial intelli…Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? the challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies (2024)Death of a reviewer or death …Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality? (2024)Can ChatGPT evaluate research…AI Snake Oil (2024)AI Snake OilTesting of detection tools for AI-generated text (2023)Testing of detection tools fo…Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots (2023)Guidance for Authors, Peer Re…Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023)Fighting reviewer fatigue or …Detecting AI content in responses generated by ChatGPT, YouChat, and Chatsonic: The case of five AI content detection tools (2023)Detecting AI content in respo…ChatGPT and the Future of Journal Reviews: A Feasibility Study (2023)ChatGPT and the Future of Jou…Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review (2023)Artificial intelligence to su…What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)What is open peer review? A s…Bias in peer review (2012)Bias in peer reviewScience as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science (1988)Science as Social Knowledge (1990)A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England (1994)Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science (2016)Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature (2017)Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories (2019)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought (2013)The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future (2018)AI-assisted peer review (2021)Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic (2021)The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions (2023)The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts (2023)Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond (2023)Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT (2023)Will ChatGPT get you caught? Rethinking of Plagiarism Detection (2023)Rethinking Plagiarism in the Era of Generative AI (2024)Simple techniques to bypass GenAI text detectors: implications for inclusive education (2024)The use of Generative AI in qualitative analysis: Inductive thematic analysis with ChatGPT (2024)Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge (2023)Reporting Use of AI in Research and Scholarly Publication—JAMA Network Guidance (2024)The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise (2016)ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing (2023)Inteligencia artificial, investigación y revisión por pares: escenarios futuros y estrategias de acción (2023)When and how to disclose AI use in academic publishing: AMEE Guide No.192 (2025)Aion Framework: Dimensional Emergence of AI Consciousness, Observer-Induced Collapse, and Cosmological Portal Dynamics (2023)Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers (2023)Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis (2024)Combating misinformation in the age of LLMs: Opportunities and challenges (2024)I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE (1950)The Essential Tension (1977)International Organization for Standardization (2011)AI Anxiety: a comprehensive analysis of psychological factors and interventions (2025)Disclosing artificial intelligence use in scientific research and publication: When should disclosure be mandatory, optional, or unnecessary? (2025)Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in the research process – A survey of researchers’ practices and perceptions (2025)Can Large Language Models Provide Useful Feedback on Research Papers? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis (2024)Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis (2024)AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried (2025)Defining the Boundaries of AI Use in Scientific Writing: A Comparative Review of Editorial Policies (2025)Artificial Intelligence for Social Innovation: Beyond the Noise of Algorithms and Datafication (2024)Competing narratives in AI ethics: a defense of sociotechnical pragmatism (2024)Deepfakes, Phrenology, Surveillance, and More! A Taxonomy of AI Privacy Risks (2024)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2012Bias in peer review997 cited
  • 2023Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text577 cited
  • 2017What is open peer review? A systematic review453 cited
  • 2023Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review268 cited
  • 2024The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool220 cited
  • 2023Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review160 cited
  • 2023Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots141 cited
  • 2023Detecting AI content in responses generated by ChatGPT, YouChat, and Chatsonic: The case of five AI content detection tools132 cited
  • 2024AI Snake Oil105 cited
  • 2024Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals78 cited
  • 2024Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality?68 cited
  • 2024Use of artificial intelligence and the future of peer review66 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT and the Future of Journal Reviews: A Feasibility Study65 cited
  • 2024Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? the challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies63 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 2025Exploring the Impact of Generative AI on Peer Review: Insights from Journal Reviewers42 cited
  • 2024Generative artificial intelligence is infiltrating peer review process41 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.