Auctions and Prediction Markets for Scientific Peer Review
  Peer reviewed publications are considered the gold standard in certifying and
disseminating ideas that a research community considers valuable. However, we
identify two major drawbacks of the current system: (1) the overwhelming demand
for reviewers due to a large volume of submissions, and (2) the lack of
incentives for reviewers to participate and expend the necessary effort to
provide high-quality reviews. In this work, we adopt a mechanism-design
approach to propose improvements to the peer review process. We present a
two-stage mechanism which ties together the paper submission and review
process, simultaneously incentivizing high-quality reviews and high-quality
submissions. In the first stage, authors participate in a VCG auction for
review slots by submitting their papers along with a bid that represents their
expected value for having their paper reviewed. For the second stage, we
propose a novel prediction market-style mechanism (H-DIPP) building on recent
work in the information elicitation literature, which incentivizes
participating reviewers to provide honest and effortful reviews. The revenue
raised by the Stage I auction is used in Stage II to pay reviewers based on the
quality of their reviews.
