home.social

#peerreview — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #peerreview, aggregated by home.social.

fetched live
  1. One of the annoying things when having to review vibe-coded changes, is what I would call "method of the week": A quirk of the currently used LLM model found in a majority of PRs/MRs that vibe-coders don't learn to change before requesting a review despite being told multiple times.

    #LLMs #vibeCoding #codeReview #peerReview #noAI #AI #artificialIntelligence #genAI #generativeAI #amCoding #amProgramming #softwareDevelopment #softwareEngineering

  2. One of the annoying things when having to review vibe-coded changes, is what I would call "method of the week": A quirk of the currently used LLM model found in a majority of PRs/MRs that vibe-coders don't learn to change before requesting a review despite being told multiple times.

    #LLMs #vibeCoding #codeReview #peerReview #noAI #AI #artificialIntelligence #genAI #generativeAI #amCoding #amProgramming #softwareDevelopment #softwareEngineering

  3. #PeerReview galt immer als Goldstandard der #Forschungsförderung. Aber musste er das je beweisen? Finn Lübber und Sören Krach erklären in unserem Essayheft, warum ausgerechnet eine Lotterie fairer, billiger und robuster sein könnte: 👉 laborjournal.de/rubric/essays/

  4. #PeerReview galt immer als Goldstandard der #Forschungsförderung. Aber musste er das je beweisen? Finn Lübber und Sören Krach erklären in unserem Essayheft, warum ausgerechnet eine Lotterie fairer, billiger und robuster sein könnte: 👉 laborjournal.de/rubric/essays/

  5. "In retrospect, these strategies were a form of authorial self-preservation."

    Autoethnography of the rhetorical and emotional dimensions of writing about study limitations:
    journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/

    The paper draws on 8 manuscripts, 17 drafts, 22 #PeerReview by the author, journal entries, and email exchanges.

    Interesting reflections & it illustrates the challenges and questions, especially if one has not written many manuscripts, yet.

    #AcademicChatter #AcademicWriting #NightshiftEditor #ECRs

  6. "In retrospect, these strategies were a form of authorial self-preservation."

    Autoethnography of the rhetorical and emotional dimensions of writing about study limitations:
    journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/

    The paper draws on 8 manuscripts, 17 drafts, 22 #PeerReview by the author, journal entries, and email exchanges.

    Interesting reflections & it illustrates the challenges and questions, especially if one has not written many manuscripts, yet.

    #AcademicChatter #AcademicWriting #NightshiftEditor #ECRs

  7. "Peer review is imperfect, sometimes exclusionary, occasionally petty. We have all seen nonsensical reports and capricious delays. But the answer to those failings is to invest more in the human practice – through training, recognition and realistic expectation – not to hollow it out."
    timeshighereducation.com/opini

    #ai #academicchatter #peerreview

  8. "Peer review is imperfect, sometimes exclusionary, occasionally petty. We have all seen nonsensical reports and capricious delays. But the answer to those failings is to invest more in the human practice – through training, recognition and realistic expectation – not to hollow it out."
    timeshighereducation.com/opini

    #ai #academicchatter #peerreview

  9. New study: "We show…that research assessment is driven more by differences between evaluators than by difference in the evaluated research."
    arxiv.org/abs/2607.09783

    #Academia #Assessment #PeerReview #ScholComm #Universities

    Judges matter more than papers...

  10. New study: "We show…that research assessment is driven more by differences between evaluators than by difference in the evaluated research."
    arxiv.org/abs/2607.09783

    #Academia #Assessment #PeerReview #ScholComm #Universities

  11. New study: "We show…that research assessment is driven more by differences between evaluators than by difference in the evaluated research."
    arxiv.org/abs/2607.09783

    #Academia #Assessment #PeerReview #ScholComm #Universities

  12. Symbolic image of the state of #academic #publishing: The original study does not contain much detail (most certainly not a single word of #humour), and the #replication study is locked up behind a #paywall, on which #impactfactor, #peerreview, #plagiarism, #copyright and #publicationbias are having #popcorn.

    #scicomm #openaccess

  13. Symbolic image of the state of #academic #publishing: The original study does not contain much detail (most certainly not a single word of #humour), and the #replication study is locked up behind a #paywall, on which #impactfactor, #peerreview, #plagiarism, #copyright and #publicationbias are having #popcorn.

    #scicomm #openaccess

  14. "If we still believe that science is a vocation grounded in argument, curiosity and care, we can’t delegate judgement to machines"

    timeshighereducation.com/opini

    #ai #peerreview #academia

  15. "If we still believe that science is a vocation grounded in argument, curiosity and care, we can’t delegate judgement to machines"

    timeshighereducation.com/opini

    #ai #peerreview #academia

  16. If you coordinate a PREreview Club, we’ve got news for you

    Now club leads can ask us to attach a review to their club’s page directly within the review workflow. No need to email us!

    👉 Find out more about this and other platform optimizations for clubs in today’s Weeknote:
    content.prereview.org/prerevie

    #OpenInfrastructure #PeerReview

  17. If you coordinate a PREreview Club, we’ve got news for you

    Now club leads can ask us to attach a review to their club’s page directly within the review workflow. No need to email us!

    👉 Find out more about this and other platform optimizations for clubs in today’s Weeknote:
    content.prereview.org/prerevie

    #OpenInfrastructure #PeerReview

  18. Wut? Senior author Jonathan Grant writes about grant funding (Grant funding?) 😂

    "The costs and benefits of research grant funding peer review"

    f1000research.com/articles/15-

    #peerreview #funding #research #academicchatter

  19. Wut? Senior author Jonathan Grant writes about grant funding (Grant funding?) 😂

    "The costs and benefits of research grant funding peer review"

    f1000research.com/articles/15-

    #peerreview #funding #research #academicchatter

  20. It is 2026, and we still get this criticism in a review: "First and foremost, the contribution is primarily confirmatory […] I would argue that the work is predominantly incremental." Yes. This is called the scientific method. How can we change the strange interpretation of novelty that is in many reviewers' heads?
    @seresearchers
    #peerreview #EmpiricalResearch

  21. It is 2026, and we still get this criticism in a review: "First and foremost, the contribution is primarily confirmatory […] I would argue that the work is predominantly incremental." Yes. This is called the scientific method. How can we change the strange interpretation of novelty that is in many reviewers' heads?
    @seresearchers
    #peerreview #EmpiricalResearch

  22. The review resulting from our Community #LiveReview on June 25th is now published.

    When an important piece of research shared as a preprint on medRxiv was prevented from receiving journal-organized #PeerReview, the community joined forces and stepped in.

    Open, community-driven review offers a different future for research evaluation—one centered on dialogue, transparency, training, and broader participation. A future that extends beyond the research publication as a finish line, to enable continuous scrutiny and conversation.

    We are grateful to @csmarcum for taking the lead on this initiative, and to everyone who participated in this rigorous and deeply human collaborative review session.

    👉 Read the review and share your thoughts openly through our comment feature: prereview.org/reviews/21327744

  23. The review resulting from our Community #LiveReview on June 25th is now published.

    When an important piece of research shared as a preprint on medRxiv was prevented from receiving journal-organized #PeerReview, the community joined forces and stepped in.

    Open, community-driven review offers a different future for research evaluation—one centered on dialogue, transparency, training, and broader participation. A future that extends beyond the research publication as a finish line, to enable continuous scrutiny and conversation.

    We are grateful to @csmarcum for taking the lead on this initiative, and to everyone who participated in this rigorous and deeply human collaborative review session.

    👉 Read the review and share your thoughts openly through our comment feature: prereview.org/reviews/21327744

  24. Oh, sweet summer child, you thought your preprint would magically appear on arXiv overnight? 😂 Apparently, someone finally decided to hold your self-important drivel to the same standards as actual academic work. 🧐 Maybe try peer review for once, champ! 🏆
    fi-le.net/arxiv/ #preprintissues #peerreview #academicstandards #summerchild #selfimportance #HackerNews #ngated

  25. Oh, sweet summer child, you thought your preprint would magically appear on arXiv overnight? 😂 Apparently, someone finally decided to hold your self-important drivel to the same standards as actual academic work. 🧐 Maybe try peer review for once, champ! 🏆
    fi-le.net/arxiv/ #preprintissues #peerreview #academicstandards #summerchild #selfimportance #HackerNews #ngated

  26. Want to always win research grants 🏆 and get all your manuscripts accepted? Scientists may have figured out what you need to tell #ChatGPT 🤖

    A new study tested hidden prompt injections embedded in manuscripts. When reviewers uploaded the papers to public #LLMs and asked for a review, the hidden instructions could steer the model toward a positive evaluation with a ~99% success rate.

    :doi: doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-056

    #GenAI #PeerReview #ResearchIntegrity #PromptInjection #AcademicPublishing

  27. Want to always win research grants 🏆 and get all your manuscripts accepted? Scientists may have figured out what you need to tell #ChatGPT 🤖

    A new study tested hidden prompt injections embedded in manuscripts. When reviewers uploaded the papers to public #LLMs and asked for a review, the hidden instructions could steer the model toward a positive evaluation with a ~99% success rate.

    :doi: doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-056

    #GenAI #PeerReview #ResearchIntegrity #PromptInjection #AcademicPublishing

  28. I was doing a review for a scholarly journal. It has been a while since I had reviewed for them, so I studied their advice for reviewers.

    Their sample of a good review was one I submitted in 2024.

    #Academia #PeerReview #ScholarlyWriting

  29. I was doing a review for a scholarly journal. It has been a while since I had reviewed for them, so I studied their advice for reviewers.

    Their sample of a good review was one I submitted in 2024.

    #Academia #PeerReview #ScholarlyWriting

  30. Editors: if you see authors and reviewers engaging in extended arguments over minor details, do you leave them to sort it out, or do you step in at some point?

    We've got a reviewer pushing us, for a third time, to add "a few words" to address their particular hobby horse. In our first two revisions we added a few words, and in our response explained that the issue is overstated, and more to the point, irrelevant to the discussion.

    If I were editing this I'd have put my foot down one way or the other by now. I'm finding myself less irritated by the reviewer than I am by the absentee editor at this point.

    #academia #PeerReview

  31. Editors: if you see authors and reviewers engaging in extended arguments over minor details, do you leave them to sort it out, or do you step in at some point?

    We've got a reviewer pushing us, for a third time, to add "a few words" to address their particular hobby horse. In our first two revisions we added a few words, and in our response explained that the issue is overstated, and more to the point, irrelevant to the discussion.

    If I were editing this I'd have put my foot down one way or the other by now. I'm finding myself less irritated by the reviewer than I am by the absentee editor at this point.

    #academia #PeerReview

  32. I get emails from (sometimes reputable) journals, reminding me to respond to a previous invitation to a peer-review, when no previous email about this has been received. Are they just assuming that academics don't keep track of their emails and respond better when they're instilled with a bad conscience?

    #AcademicChatter #AcademicPublishing #PeerReview #DarkPatterns

  33. I get emails from (sometimes reputable) journals, reminding me to respond to a previous invitation to a peer-review, when no previous email about this has been received. Are they just assuming that academics don't keep track of their emails and respond better when they're instilled with a bad conscience?

    #AcademicChatter #AcademicPublishing #PeerReview #DarkPatterns

  34. #AI tools meant to vet #science are surprisingly easy to fool
    AI #peerreview doesn’t produce diverse feedback and can be tricked to boost research scores
    Scientists can easily manipulate their papers to trick an AI peer review tool into rating them as stronger or more publishable than they really are, computer scientist Joachim Baumann and colleagues report. AI-generated reviews often sound the same, losing nuance and diversity of human evaluation.
    sciencenews.org/article/ai-too
    archive.ph/SJMmt

  35. #AI tools meant to vet #science are surprisingly easy to fool
    AI #peerreview doesn’t produce diverse feedback and can be tricked to boost research scores
    Scientists can easily manipulate their papers to trick an AI peer review tool into rating them as stronger or more publishable than they really are, computer scientist Joachim Baumann and colleagues report. AI-generated reviews often sound the same, losing nuance and diversity of human evaluation.
    sciencenews.org/article/ai-too
    archive.ph/SJMmt

  36. Kann ein #PeerReview die Kernaussage eines Papers durch ein völlig falsches Gutachten bestätigen? Offenbar ja. Eine Geschichte über generative #KI, editoriale Verantwortung – und ein Paper samt Gutachten, die nie wirklich gelesen wurden … 👉 laborjournal.de/blog/?p=15114
    #AcademicPublishing

  37. Kann ein #PeerReview die Kernaussage eines Papers durch ein völlig falsches Gutachten bestätigen? Offenbar ja. Eine Geschichte über generative #KI, editoriale Verantwortung – und ein Paper samt Gutachten, die nie wirklich gelesen wurden … 👉 laborjournal.de/blog/?p=15114
    #AcademicPublishing

  38. The silence around actual progress with the Neuralink Blindsight brain implant for restoring vision to the blind is deafening, and its opaqueness is blinding too. #BCI #hype vs #transparency & #peerreview

    Its noninvasive counterpart, The vOICe vision BCI, may fail to create traction, but not for lack of availability artificialvision.com/BCI.html or peer review artificialvision.com/literatur It all hinges on your imagination.

  39. The silence around actual progress with the Neuralink Blindsight brain implant for restoring vision to the blind is deafening, and its opaqueness is blinding too. #BCI #hype vs #transparency & #peerreview

    Its noninvasive counterpart, The vOICe vision BCI, may fail to create traction, but not for lack of availability artificialvision.com/BCI.html or peer review artificialvision.com/literatur It all hinges on your imagination.

  40. 2/2 Just a year after an amazing study* by Li Yao et al., doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2025) used 700+ complete plastomes of these three species confirming and enhancing 10+ year old research showing that plastomes are not sorted by species like in all #oaks and not few other Fagales. Common knowledge, unless you are an editor for BMC Genomics or SIT professor.

    *A study naturally struggling getting through #PeerReview being too complex for the Q1s and ending up in some minor journal.

    #FightTheFog

  41. 2/2 Just a year after an amazing study* by Li Yao et al., doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2025) used 700+ complete plastomes of these three species confirming and enhancing 10+ year old research showing that plastomes are not sorted by species like in all #oaks and not few other Fagales. Common knowledge, unless you are an editor for BMC Genomics or SIT professor.

    *A study naturally struggling getting through #PeerReview being too complex for the Q1s and ending up in some minor journal.

    #FightTheFog

  42. The new #CallForPapers #CfP for our upcoming Fall Issue No.48 has just been published. Check out the details via journal-derad.com and send in your abstracts! #PCVE #Deradicalization #PeerReview #OpenAcess #QualityMatters

  43. The new #CallForPapers #CfP for our upcoming Fall Issue No.48 has just been published. Check out the details via journal-derad.com and send in your abstracts! #PCVE #Deradicalization #PeerReview #OpenAcess #QualityMatters

  44. RE: mastodon.social/@gvwilson/1168

    Wow, some reviewers have completely lost all shame. Getting caught violating a policy they agreed to, they criticise the trap, rather than themselves. #NeurIPS #PeerReview #PromptInjection