Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with peer-review
Search options not deleted
user 4461
On the evaluation of work (typically, a publication or grant proposal) by the author's peers. This includes: refereeing, which is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication in a journal or conference; peer evaluation of teaching skills; peer review of research grant proposals; and post-publication review of a book or article, as is common in the field of mathematics.
6
votes
1
answer
395
views
When conducting a follow-up review for a paper you already made comments on, how detailed sh...
I think the title stands on its own, but I am not sure how detailed to make follow-up reviewer comments for a paper. My sense is that I don't need to re-review the paper, but just comment on whether …
- 18k
10
votes
Review too short and vague to be useful
Unfortunately, when submitting to a conference, you don't have control over the process to the detail you are talking about. It will probably be the case that the useless review does indeed get less w …
- 18k
11
votes
Is it a bad idea to submit a paper merely to elicit reviewers' comments?
Reviewers almost universally volunteer their time, and if you are sending a paper that you feel will be rejected because it isn't ready for publication, and/or has serious flaws, then you'll waste the …
- 18k
9
votes
Add acknowledgments and self citations to paper only after the blind review?
To your best ability, you should remove all identifying information for the blind review. This includes removing author names and affiliations, avoiding phrases such as "in our previous work," and re …
- 18k