AI offers great potential, but also raises significant concerns when it comes to its use in peer review. Experimentation with AI is needed to find the right role for it in the process.
Users (human and machine) are accessing scholarly content in new ways, challenging traditional usage analytics models. In this guest post, Tim Lloyd outlines the challenges ahead in quantifying usage.
In today’s Peer Review Week post we hear perspectives on innovation and technology in peer review from a diverse group of users from different countries and disciplines.
Peer review needs reform. AI systems can act as assistants, providing valuable feedback for both reviewers and editors.
Are there ways to use AI in the research workflow to speed up the peer review process — and, while we’re at it, to address some of the other problems around bias and quality?
Leading into Peer Review Week 2024, we ask the Chefs: What is, or would be, the most valuable innovation in peer review for your community?
No, we’re not advocating anything lascivious. But a reading experience requires a degree of engagement that one essayist overlooks.
AI-generated content has been discovered in prominent journals. Should peer reviewers be expected to find AI text in manuscripts? Where in the publication workflow should these checks be done?
Publishers should support scholarly authors by requiring license deals with AI developers include attribution in their outputs.
A look at how AI tools support transforming information access into information comprehension.
Did you know that PowerPoint is the only computing application you need to do, well, anything?
To learn about how Scopus AI works under the hood, we interview Elsevier Sr. VP of Analytics Products and Data Platform, Maxim Khan.
Do publishers really understand what tools researchers are using and how they are using them? Can we do more to create better policies based on real use cases and not hypothetical conjecture about what AI might do in the future?
In today’s Chef de Cuisine article, Robert Harington talks with Michael Levine-Clark, Dean of the University of Denver Libraries. The University Libraries are currently ranked as the #3 “best college library” by Princeton Review.
Citing chatbots as information sources offer little in terms of promoting smart use of generative AI and could also be damaging.