TF-IDF identifies labeled experts in the top 25 recommendations 79.5% of the time versus 51.5% for GPT-4o mini on an astronomy observatory dataset.
The Messenger , year = 2019, month = sep, volume =
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
2
Pith papers citing it
years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2representative citing papers
Analysis of 13 ALMA cycles shows distributed peer review reproduces panel-based proposal ranking trends at the population level across demographics and science areas.
citing papers explorer
-
Traditional statistical representations outperform generative AI in identifying expert peer reviewers
TF-IDF identifies labeled experts in the top 25 recommendations 79.5% of the time versus 51.5% for GPT-4o mini on an astronomy observatory dataset.
-
Distributed Peer Review at ALMA: An Empirical Comparison with Panel-Based Review
Analysis of 13 ALMA cycles shows distributed peer review reproduces panel-based proposal ranking trends at the population level across demographics and science areas.