Generative artificial intelligence is infiltrating peer review process

Excerpt

The advancement of scientific research has been rapid in recent years, leading to a surge in the number of manuscript submissions and posing formidable challenges to peer review processes. In addressing these challenges, some generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools have emerged as potentially effective solutions [1, 2]. For instance, Saad et al. [3] explored the efficiency and efficacy of one such generative AI tool, the ChatGPT, in the peer review process. Each article underwent review by two human reviewers alongside ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4. ChatGPT was tasked with providing three positive and three negative comments on the articles, along with recommendations for acceptance or rejection. Their findings demonstrated ChatGPT was able to complement human scientific peer review, improving the efficiency and timeliness of the editorial process. Verharen et al. [4] utilized ChatGPT to examine language usage in over 500 publicly available peer review reports from 200 neuroscience papers published between 2022 and 2023. The findings revealed that the majority of reviews for these published papers were deemed favorable by ChatGPT (89.8% of reviews), with language use characterized as predominantly polite (99.8% of reviews). This study underscores the potential of generative AI in natural language processing of specialized scientific texts. However, careful consideration is warranted in balancing the roles of AI tools and human experts to ensure fairness and reliability in the peer review process. …