Daily Arxiv

This page organizes papers related to artificial intelligence published around the world.
This page is summarized using Google Gemini and is operated on a non-profit basis.
The copyright of the paper belongs to the author and the relevant institution. When sharing, simply cite the source.

Justice in Judgment: Unveiling (Hidden) Bias in LLM-assisted Peer Reviews

Created by
  • Haebom

Author

Sai Suresh Macharla Vasu, Ivaxi Sheth, Hui-Po Wang, Ruta Binkyte, Mario Fritz

Outline

The use of large-scale language models (LLMs) is transforming the peer review process, helping to create more detailed evaluations and even automating the generation of full reviews. This paper conducted a controlled experiment to investigate biases in LLM-generated peer reviews regarding sensitive metadata, such as author affiliations and gender. We found consistent affiliation biases favoring institutions ranked highly in standard academic rankings, as well as gender preferences. We observed that these implicit biases were even more pronounced in token-based soft ratings.

Takeaways, Limitations

Affiliation bias exists in LLM-based peer review, which tends to favor higher-ranked institutions.
Gender preferences also emerge, and although subtle, they can accumulate over time.
Implicit bias is more pronounced in token-based soft ratings.
The study raises important questions about the fairness and reliability of LLM-based peer review.
👍