论文标题
在双盲审查中,通过ARXIV提交的作者将作者匿名化
De-anonymization of authors through arXiv submissions during double-blind review
论文作者
论文摘要
在本文中,我们研究了正在经历双盲审查过程的论文的arxiv预印象的影响。特别是,我们提出以下研究问题:作者通过ARXIV预印本与(名义上的)双盲场所接受研究论文的匿名化是什么关系?在两个条件下:在审查阶段之前在Arxiv上发表的论文以及未释放的论文,我们研究了作者的声誉与审查分数和接受决策之间的相关性。通过分析ICLR 2020和ICLR 2019提交的数据集(n = 5050),我们发现统计学上有显着的证据表明,在ARXIV上释放高声誉的论文之间的正相关性是正相关的。为了更好地理解这种观察到的关联,我们基于审稿人的自我指定的置信度得分进行了其他分析,并观察到,较不自信的审稿人更有可能将高审核分数分配给具有知名作者的论文和低审阅得分的论文,并将较知名作者的论文分配,在这些论文中,在Google Scholar引用数量的数量方面,声誉量化。我们强调,我们的结果纯粹是相关的,我们既不打算也打算提出任何因果主张。报纸和我们的刮擦代码随附的博客文章将在项目网站https://sites.google.com/view/deanon-arxiv/home链接
In this paper, we investigate the effects of releasing arXiv preprints of papers that are undergoing a double-blind review process. In particular, we ask the following research question: What is the relation between de-anonymization of authors through arXiv preprints and acceptance of a research paper at a (nominally) double-blind venue? Under two conditions: papers that are released on arXiv before the review phase and papers that are not, we examine the correlation between the reputation of their authors with the review scores and acceptance decisions. By analyzing a dataset of ICLR 2020 and ICLR 2019 submissions (n=5050), we find statistically significant evidence of positive correlation between percentage acceptance and papers with high reputation released on arXiv. In order to understand this observed association better, we perform additional analyses based on self-specified confidence scores of reviewers and observe that less confident reviewers are more likely to assign high review scores to papers with well known authors and low review scores to papers with less known authors, where reputation is quantified in terms of number of Google Scholar citations. We emphasize upfront that our results are purely correlational and we neither can nor intend to make any causal claims. A blog post accompanying the paper and our scraping code will be linked in the project website https://sites.google.com/view/deanon-arxiv/home