1 / 8

Peer Reviewing

Peer reviewing plays a crucial role in the academic landscape, ensuring the quality and integrity of research publications. This process involves anonymous, independent, and impartial evaluations where papers are reviewed by experts in the field. Reviewers provide feedback on weaknesses and suggestions for improvement, contributing significantly to the refinement of submitted works. Although peer reviewing is not perfect, it increases the likelihood of identifying issues and enhancing the overall quality of research. This document outlines the mechanics of peer reviewing, its importance, and its impact on scientific discourse.

wells
Télécharger la présentation

Peer Reviewing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Peer Reviewing Sergej Sizov

  2. The Cycle in Which we Live… IMPACT Research Existing Researchers Publications New Researchers People & Money Dissemination Practice

  3. Peer review: general idea

  4. Peer review: general idea • Anonymous • Independent • Impartial

  5. How it works • Copy of the paper is sent to the co-chairs • Conference System • Email • Co-chairs send to reviewers • Reviewers point out: • Problems/weakness • Suggestions for improvements • Grade

  6. Peer review • given: set of reviewers V = {v1,…,vk }, confidence grades res(vi ,d ) for submission d • collective result (restrictivity by thresholds t1 and t2 , tuning by weights w(vi ) ):

  7. General idea: accurate restrictive decisions submissions 0 committee decision A R Bad A A0 AA AR E R R O R accepted papers real quality R RA RR R0 Irrelevant Junk JA JR J0 reduction tradeoff !

  8. Conclusion • Peer reviewing is not perfect! • but it increases the probability that weakness will be identified and improve.

More Related