News: Academic Publishing Weekly

Reviewers (allegedly) use LLMs on conference papers, challenges in academic publishing, and even more year-end book lists

Posted on December 12, 2025 in News

Academic Publishing Struggles Under Its Own Weight

A new post up on The Scholarly Kitchen by Mandy Hill, Managing Director of Cambridge University Press, is the latest to wrestle with the overwhelming volume of scientific research. For example, peer review, observes Hill, is struggling to manage the flow and she argues that more technology and workflow changes simply kick an unsustainable can down the road. The solution? Less is more. In a radical statement, from a publisher no less, Hill proposes that the number of journal articles “…needs to be reduced. We need to be publishing less, but better.” Cue the commentariat! A component of Hill’s proposal is to overhaul the “academic reward and recognition” system so it doesn’t favor quantity over value. This dilemma is also a key takeaway in a new whitepaper from Sage. Called “Do social scientists care if they make societal impact?”, the paper reveals that, yes, social and behavioral science researchers actually favor real-world impact over impact factors. When asked whether the “ultimate goal” of their research is to “make a positive impact on society”, 92 percent agreed for themselves, but only 68 percent believed institutional leadership would agree.

---

---

Reviewers Discovered Using LLMs on Conference Papers

Sticking with the glut of research theme, the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) was caught up in a social media fracas when it was discovered that peer reviewers were using LLMs to write or edit reviews of submitted papers. Graham Neubig, an Associate Professor of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University, took to X to voice his suspicion that his submissions were resulting in strange, ChatGPT-ish review feedback. AI-detection platform Pangram saw the post and took it upon itself to analyze the conference’s 75,000 reviews. The result? Pangram claimed one in five were AI-generated. (Neubig later suffered the indignity of having to “publicly respond to his anonymous reviewers and their suggestions, no matter how inane they sounded,” according to a report in The Chronicle.) But, such is the world we live in. First of all, 75,000 reviews for one conference?! Second of all, the ICLR received 11,600 paper submissions. The next conference, being held in April, has already received 19,000 submissions. Overwhelming indeed.

---

OUP Moves from Madison to Fifth, ACLS OA Awards Open for Nominations, and Bobley Named Stand UP Award Winner

Oxford University Press closed on the sale of its Madison Avenue offices in New York, according to a report from Publishers Weekly. Investment group Benchmark Properties picked it up for $40 million. OUP has relocated to new office space on 5th Avenue. The American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) announced it is now accepting nominations for the 2026 ACLS Open Access Book Prize (authors) and the Arcadia Open Access Publishing Award (publishers). In their third year, and made possible by a grant from Arcadia, the awards recognize authors and publishers of open Humanities scholarship. Meanwhile, Brett Bobley was named the 2025 AUPresses Stand UP award winner. The award recognizes individuals or groups that support and celebrate the university press community. Bobley is the founding Director of the Office of Digital Humanities within the National Endowment for the Humanities. Congratulations, Brett!

---

---

Technology (Mostly AI) Deals and Partnerships

Digital Science has introduced “next-generation AI capabilities” into Overleaf, the first of Digital Science’s “next development phase of AI-based solutions.” The new capabilities are twofold, including a writing assistant and a citation reviewer that “helps authors catch missing citations and strengthen the integrity of their work.” Asking for feedback from users, Digital Science and Overleaf are currently offering the AI tools as a closed beta option. Next, library organization OCLC joined the AI game. Primarily for cataloging purposes, the new AI functions provide suggested classification numbers and subject headings, reportedly “saving up to 20 minutes per title” for librarians as tested in the pilot. OCLC emphasized that “catalogers stay in full control,” as libraries can adjust the suggestion settings and ignore recommendations. Finally, Cactus Communications will offer De Gruyter Brill authors “editorial, translation, publication, and research promotion services” through its brand Editage. Aimed at scholars in Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences, the partnership will provide “end-to-end support at every stage of their research journey.” While Editage doesn’t specifically list AI tech in its toolkit, it “combines human expertise with advanced technology,” in addition to Cactus Communications specializing in AI services, so, you do the math.

---

Deals on Deals: T&F and CAUL and GeoRef with Full Text

Taylor & Francis and the Council of Australasian University Librarians (CAUL) have entered a three-year agreement, allowing researchers at participating universities to publish open access in Taylor & Francis and Routledge journals. This deal expands T&F’s collective publishing model, Collective Pathway to Open Publishing, paving the way for Australasian authors to publish OA in 2026. Also tucked into the agreement includes the “use of licensed Taylor & Francis proprietary content in connection with AI technologies, with appropriate safeguards, for non-commercial research and educational purposes.” In other news, EBSCO Information Services teamed up with the American Geosciences Institute (AGI) to create GeoRef with Full Text, providing “full-text access to leading journals and magazines, offering expansive geoscience coverage across time and geography.” Including articles and conference materials, GeoRef with Full Text offers “global content in multiple languages” for a “uniquely comprehensive and international view of geoscience research.”

---

Who’s Excited for More Book Lists (and Book Covers!)?

Don’t you love year-end book lists? When else do we get to pensively scroll a list, letting out an occasional “huh” or “I heard that one was good” with little to no intention of ever following up on it? So, without further ado, more book lists. First The Guardian collected its favorites into one handy dandy homepage, broken down by categories like memoir and biography, history and politics, and science and nature. Covering nonfiction and fiction, The Atlantic put together its top ten books of the year, heralding them “the books that made us think the most this year.” Moving into nonfiction specifically, Kirkus Reviews shared its picks for best nonfiction. This comprehensive list (it’s long!) highlights books on topics like Malcolm X, McCarthyism, and John Lennon and Paul McCartney. In addition, Publishers Weekly updated its annual Best Books module with 25 nonfiction titles. To wrap up, Literary Hub published “The 173 Best Book Covers of 2025,” spotlighting the eye-catching and stunning work of cover designers and proving that you can judge a book by its cover (yes, several university press titles made the list!).

---

Related Posts