{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2020:QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP","short_pith_number":"pith:QJXSRKK3","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"826f28a95b57a8d5c862fc74ef25012beb233af6c131ad3165d508b306c46af0","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2001.10617","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Systematic Review of Approaches to Improve Peer Assessment at Scale","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI","cs.CL","cs.HC"],"primary_cat":"cs.CY","authors_text":"Manikandan Ravikiran","submitted_at":"2020-01-27T15:59:24Z","abstract_excerpt":"Peer Assessment is a task of analysis and commenting on student's writing by peers, is core of all educational components both in campus and in MOOC's. However, with the sheer scale of MOOC's & its inherent personalised open ended learning, automatic grading and tools assisting grading at scale is highly important. Previously we presented survey on tasks of post classification, knowledge tracing and ended with brief review on Peer Assessment (PA), with some initial problems. In this review we shall continue review on PA from perspective of improving the review process itself. As such rest of t"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2001.10617","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CY","submitted_at":"2020-01-27T15:59:24Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI","cs.CL","cs.HC"],"title_canon_sha256":"4fe7921cd6754575ca8aaa81e4b57c7d2d55c6de58c6e98573c040e6544123aa","abstract_canon_sha256":"8c8526be9874fae1d5b92ef2208779d550fc9a29b7bce471890c763908aeb69f"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712746Z","signature_b64":"lunFQF7bawLbGhvGuuKo8c4aX35avA2lOqpaHiXN+GtGxWpJsi9wxhIu3jvfseR1eaHxOkLIvTB/LOYcfqcJAg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"826f28a95b57a8d5c862fc74ef25012beb233af6c131ad3165d508b306c46af0","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712309Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712309Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Systematic Review of Approaches to Improve Peer Assessment at Scale","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI","cs.CL","cs.HC"],"primary_cat":"cs.CY","authors_text":"Manikandan Ravikiran","submitted_at":"2020-01-27T15:59:24Z","abstract_excerpt":"Peer Assessment is a task of analysis and commenting on student's writing by peers, is core of all educational components both in campus and in MOOC's. However, with the sheer scale of MOOC's & its inherent personalised open ended learning, automatic grading and tools assisting grading at scale is highly important. Previously we presented survey on tasks of post classification, knowledge tracing and ended with brief review on Peer Assessment (PA), with some initial problems. In this review we shall continue review on PA from perspective of improving the review process itself. As such rest of t"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2001.10617","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2001.10617/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2001.10617","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2001.10617v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2001.10617","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"QJXSRKK3K6UN","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"QJXSRKK3","created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2508.11678","citing_title":"Optimizing Peer Grading: A Systematic Literature Review of Reviewer Assignment Strategies and Quantity of Reviewers","ref_index":12,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP","json":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/QJXSRKK3"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/QJXSRKK3","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2001.10617&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/QJXSRKK3K6UNLSDC7R2O6JIBFP/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T00:37:19.712378+00:00"}