🔗 Who cites «Position: The AI Conference Peer Review Crisis Demands Author Feedback and Reviewer Rewards»

13 papers of our library cite it (of the 149,439 whose bibliographies we read) · 5 with a page here, the most cited first · ← back to «Position: The AI Conference Peer Review Crisis Demands Author Feedback and Reviewer Rewards»

1. AI4Research: A Survey of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific ResearchScience China Information SciencesQiguang Chen, Mingda Yang, Libo Qin, et al.2025 · 21 citations
2. Reviewing Scientific Papers for Critical Problems With Reasoning LLMs: Baseline Approaches and Automatic EvaluationarXiv:2505.23824Tianmai M. Zhang, Neil F. Abernethy2025 · 7 citations
3. PseudoBench: Measuring How Agentic Auto-Research Fuels PseudosciencearXiv:2606.18060Xinyang Liao, Lingyu Li, Huacan Liu, et al.2026 · 1 citation
4. GhostWriter: Hidden AI-Generated Texts over Multiple Languages, Domains and GeneratorsLanguage Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC)Manuel Schaaf, Kevin Bönisch, Alexander Mehler2026
5. Position: Academic Conferences are Potentially Facing Denominator Gaming Caused by Fully Automated Scientific AgentsarXiv:2605.09915Rong Shan, Te Gao, Hang Zheng, et al.2026

8 more papers of our library cite it; they have no page here yet.

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/kim-2025-position-ai-conference-peer-review/cited-by/