// NATURE NEWS — SPAZIO & SCIENZA
The future of peer review requires AI support, not AI bans
Search author on:
PubMed
Google Scholar
Scientific publishing is facing a challenge. Submission volumes are rising, manuscripts are increasingly complex and it’s becoming harder to get reviewers and timely reviews. Even though artificial-intelligence tools have become a powerful assistant in research, most journals don’t allow reviewers to use them. The rationale is understandable. Confidential manuscripts should not be exposed to public AI systems, and reviewers must remain accountable for their assessment. Yet blanket bans address concerns imperfectly and are hard to monitor.
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried
More than half of researchers now use AI for peer review — often against guidance
When the best decision is no decision: the rise of randomization in grant funding
‘A waste of time for all of us’: caught in the crossfire of the peer-review wars
Papers with open peer-review reports are less likely to be retracted