arXiv:2606. 26382v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Social-physical human-robot interaction (spHRI) has grown rapidly across robotics, human-computer interaction, human-robot interaction, and haptics.
Social-physical human-robot interaction (spHRI) has grown rapidly across robotics, human-computer interaction, human-robot interaction, and haptics. Yet, fragmented terminology and inconsistent methodologies make systematic synthesis difficult.
The paper introduces CoSLR, a Human‑AI collaborative system for systematic literature reviews that incorporates mandatory human checkpoints within a three‑phase pipeline using large language models and Retrieval‑Augmented Generation. In a survey of 63 participants, 42.9 % rated the system’s usability highly, yet 34.9 % indicated they would trust AI‑generated summaries without further human verification after brief interaction. The study highlights that effective human oversight in AI‑assisted literature reviews depends on users’ willingness to engage with the checkpoints, underscoring a calibration issue that interface design must directly address.
arXiv:2608.21374v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Literature reviews are essential to scientific progress, but rigorously evaluating automatically generated reviews remains difficult because many aspec...
arXiv:2605. 03202v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models offer a tempting solution to address the peer review crisis.
AI-assisted peer review is increasingly discussed and adopted as a tool to support the scientific publishing process, yet there is little systematic understanding of how publication venues regulate its use or of how capable current AI review systems are. We address these questions by first surveying reviewer-facing AI policies across 111 leading AI/NLP conferences and medical journals, revealing substantial regulation differences between the two communities.
arXiv:2608. 03581v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI-assisted peer review is increasingly discussed and adopted as a tool to support the scientific publishing process, yet there is little systematic understanding of how publication venues regulate its use or of how capable current AI review systems are.
arXiv:2506. 08134v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Peer review, the bedrock of scientific advancement in machine learning (ML), is strained by a crisis of scale.
arXiv:2511. 13480v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This study focuses on understanding the complex dynamics between humans and AI systems by analyzing user reviews.
Context: Generative AI (GenAI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for academic tasks in software engineering and beyond, including systematic literature reviews (SLRs). However, while capable of summarizing text, there is no guarantee they can meet the rigour, reliability, and transparency that SLRs require.
arXiv:2608. 03659v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate scientific reviews, yet existing evaluations rarely examine whether different providers align with both conference decisions and human reviewing priorities within the same controlled setting.
The paper introduces Vocalizer, a mobile app that lets users submit spoken online reviews enhanced by a large language model. A longitudinal study shows that users often use the AI to add detail and that interactive AI features boost confidence and willingness to share reviews. The authors also outline the benefits and challenges of embedding AI assistance in review-writing systems.
arXiv:2606. 01013v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Research is advancing faster than ever with artificial intelligence (AI); and so are the corresponding research papers.