AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other AI systems can detect flaws with digital images and suspected plagiarism.
“Other AI systems can detect flaws with digital images and suspected plagiarism [81–83].”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [81]
Many scientific journals have already begun using AI tools to assist with the editorial process.
“Many scientific journals have already begun using AI tools to assist with the editorial process.”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [81]
Scientists who are asked to serve as reviewers have used AI to help them complete this task, often without disclosing this to journal editors and in direct violation of publisher policies.
“Scientists who are asked to serve as reviewers have used AI to help them complete this task, often without disclosing this to journal editors and in direct violation of publisher policies [81].”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [81]
Cites
Liang, W., Zhang, Y., Cao, H., Wang, B., Ding, D., Yang, X., Vodrahalli, K., He, S., Smith, D., Yin, Y., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.01783 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals
Li, Z.-Q., Xu, H.-L., Cao, H.-J., Liu, Z.-L., Fei, Y.-T., & Liu, J.-P. (2024) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48609 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Use of artificial intelligence and the future of peer review
Bauchner, H., & Rivara, F. (2024) · Health affairs scholar · doi:10.1093/haschl/qxae058 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
The review mills, not just (self-)plagiarism in review reports, but a step further
Oviedo-García, M. (2024) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-024-05125-w · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values
Resnik, D. B., Hosseini, M., & Hauswald, R. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00908-0 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Large language models for peer review in biotechnology
Li, W., Zhao, R., Sun, P.-T., Lee, J., Lu, O., Yuan, S., Sureshkumar, P., Chen, Y., Xiao, Z., & Tang, Y. J. (2026) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2026.03.007 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Naddaf, M.
- Corresponding author
- Naddaf, Miryam
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2025-03-26
- Volume
- 639
- Issue
- 8056
- Pages
- 852-854
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W4408922361
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 31 · 2025: 30
- FWCI
- 232.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, peer review, scholarly publishing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
