7 citations · 16 across the 6 of their papers we have counts for
7 papers
Benchmarking Fraud Detectors on Private Graph Data
Alexander Goldberg, Giulia Fanti, Nihar Shah +1
We introduce the novel problem of benchmarking fraud detectors on private graph-structured data. Currently, many types of fraud are managed in part by automated detection algorithm…
A Principled Approach to Randomized Selection under Uncertainty: Applications to Peer Review and Grant Funding
Alexander Goldberg, Giulia Fanti, Nihar B. Shah
Many decision-making processes involve evaluating and then selecting items; examples include scientific peer review, job hiring, school admissions, and investment decisions. The ev…
Causal Effect of Group Diversity on Redundancy and Coverage in Peer-Reviewing
Navita Goyal, Ivan Stelmakh, Nihar Shah +1
A large host of scientific journals and conferences solicit peer reviews from multiple reviewers for the same submission, aiming to gather a broader range of perspectives and mitig…
Usefulness of LLMs as an Author Checklist Assistant for Scientific Papers: NeurIPS'24 Experiment
Alexander Goldberg, Ihsan Ullah, Thanh Gia Hieu Khuong +4
Large language models (LLMs) represent a promising, but controversial, tool in aiding scientific peer review. This study evaluates the usefulness of LLMs in a conference setting as…
What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?
Ilia Kuznetsov, Osama Mohammed Afzal, Koen Dercksen +21
The number of scientific articles produced every year is growing rapidly. Providing quality control over them is crucial for scientists and, ultimately, for the public good. In mod…
A Randomized Controlled Trial on Anonymizing Reviewers to Each Other in Peer Review Discussions
Charvi Rastogi, Xiangchen Song, Zhijing Jin +4
Peer review often involves reviewers submitting their independent reviews, followed by a discussion among reviewers of each paper. A question among policymakers is whether the revi…
Peer Reviews of Peer Reviews: A Randomized Controlled Trial and Other Experiments
Alexander Goldberg, Ivan Stelmakh, Kyunghyun Cho +4
Is it possible to reliably evaluate the quality of peer reviews? We study this question driven by two primary motivations -- incentivizing high-quality reviewing using assessed qua…