TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: Using present day / nascent LLMs for academic peer reviewing?

3 点作者 Naracion大约 2 年前
The current academic publication model has several problems, including unethical fees and no payment for either the author or the reviewer (see ongoing discussion at https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=35848894). It appears that there is no good way of getting out of the trap, because: 1. Researchers rely on being recognized as published and having their papers cited for promotions.<p>So, open platforms like arxiv exist to publish to the masses. However...<p>2. Readers rely on quality criteria to sift through the thousands of articles out there. Papers in highly reputed journals and conference proceedings have already gone through a pass through expert reviews.<p>What does HN think the likelihood is of us getting an LLM that might be able to assuage this issue by providing a good, robust review judging by research quality standards? Is anybody already working on this?

3 条评论

speedgoose大约 2 年前
The point of the peer review process is to get your work reviewed by peers.<p>However LLM could be used to filter garbage papers, to help designing a research study, to help writing, or to simulate a review before submitting.
wnkrshm大约 2 年前
It could set a target to optimize against - and automatically optimize against - which may not be a good thing at all.
jruohonen大约 2 年前
Please no.