AI reviews beat top paid human peer reviews in 132 of 132 judged pairs
Harvard's Gary King and Steven Worthington compared AI-written article reviews with human reviews that editors had rated unusually good. An AI judge preferred the AI review in 132 of the 132 decided pairs, and human journal editors preferred it 87% of the time. AI reviews cited no fabricated sources, and 5.5% of their claims about the manuscript were judged incorrect, versus 15.9% for the human reviews. The authors also discuss downsides for journal policy.