





















Abstract:This article is the rejoinder to ``The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review,'' to appear in the Journal of the American Statistical Association with discussion. To address the practical and theoretical points raised by the discussants, we organize our response around four core themes: (i) formulating peer review as a statistical estimation problem; (ii) mitigating equity and strategic concerns in the deployment of the Isotonic Mechanism; (iii) incorporating complementary signals such as reviewer rankings and structured metadata; and (iv) exploring a human-centered framework for peer review in the era of generative AI.
| Comments: | Rejoinder to the JASA Discussion of "The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review" (arXiv:2408.13430) |
| Subjects: | Applications (stat.AP); Digital Libraries (cs.DL); Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.25172 [stat.AP] |
| (or arXiv:2605.25172v1 [stat.AP] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.25172 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
From: Weijie J. Su [view email]
[v1]
Sun, 24 May 2026 17:06:47 UTC (118 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。