2 citations · 2 across the 17 of their papers we have counts for
5 papers · 2 filters
Judging a Review by its Cover: A Reliability Analysis of LLM-based Peer Review Evaluation Metrics
Shakiba Amirshahi, Sajad Ebrahimi, Hai Son Le +2
Peer-review evaluation is increasingly being automated with LLM-as-a-judge metrics, but this creates a measurement risk. A review may receive a high score because it is fluent, org…
Peerify: Benchmarking Peer-Review Claim Verification
Alireza Daghighfarsoodeh, Sajad Ebrahimi, Ali Ghorbanpour +4
Peer review plays a central role in scholarly publishing, yet verifying whether reviewer claims are supported by manuscript evidence remains a largely manual and time-consuming pro…
PeeriScope: A Multi-Faceted Framework for Evaluating Peer Review Quality
Sajad Ebrahimi, Soroush Sadeghian, Ali Ghorbanpour +6
The increasing scale and variability of peer review in scholarly venues has created an urgent need for systematic, interpretable, and extensible tools to assess review quality. We…
Peerispect: Claim Verification in Scientific Peer Reviews
Ali Ghorbanpour, Soroush Sadeghian, Alireza Daghighfarsoodeh +4
Peer review is central to scientific publishing, yet reviewers frequently include claims that are subjective, rhetorical, or misaligned with the submitted work. Assessing whether r…
PeerPrism: Peer Evaluation Expertise vs Review-writing AI
Soroush Sadeghian, Alireza Daqiq, Radin Cheraghi +3
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in scientific peer review, assisting with drafting, rewriting, expansion, and refinement. However, existing peer-review LLM detec…