The CL-SciSumm 2016 shared task introduced an interesting problem: given a document D and a piece of text that cites D, how do we identify the text spans of D being referenced by the piece of text? The shared task provided the first annotated dataset for studying this problem. We present an analysis of our continued work in improving our system’s performance on this task. We demonstrate how topic models and word embeddings can be used to surpass the previously best performing system.
In the pilot task, we focus on citations and the text spans they cite in the original article. The importance of citations for summarization is discussed in @cite_23 , which compared summaries that were based on three different things: only the reference article; only the abstract; and, only citations. The best results were based on citations. @cite_7 also showed that the information from citations is different from that which can be gleaned from just the abstract or reference article. However, it is cautioned that citations often focus on very specific aspects of a paper @cite_5 .
@cite_5 @cite_7 @cite_23
2157979304 2107972503 2122778642 202505473 2146593092 2792122875 2029099433 2611254175 1978059262 2164259805 1978868011 1928454594 2053818817 2110854897 36261270 2888757417 2072050228 2017562693 2023930240 2250968833
In citation-based summarization, text written by several researchers is leveraged to identify the important aspects of a target paper. Previous work on this problem focused almost exclusively on its extraction aspect (i.e. selecting a representative set of citation sentences that highlight the contribution of the target paper). Meanwhile, the fluency of the produced summaries has been mostly ignored. For example, diversity, readability, cohesion, and ordering of the sentences included in the summary have not been thoroughly considered. This resulted in noisy and confusing summaries. In this work, we present an approach for producing readable and cohesive citation-based summaries. Our experiments show that the proposed approach outperforms several baselines in terms of both extraction quality and fluency. The old Asian legend about the blind men and the elephant comes to mind when looking at how different authors of scientific papers describe a piece of related prior work. It turns out that different citations to the same paper often focus on different aspects of that paper and that neither provides a full description of its full set of contributions. In this article, we will describe our investigation of this phenomenon. We studied citation summaries in the context of research papers in the biomedical domain. A citation summary is the set of citing sentences for a given article and can be used as a surrogate for the actual article in a variety of scenarios. It contains information that was deemed by peers to be important. Our study shows that citation summaries overlap to some extent with the abstracts of the papers and that they also differ from them in that they focus on different aspects of these papers than do the abstracts. In addition to this, co-cited articles (which are pairs of articles cited by another article) tend to be similar. We show results based on a lexical similarity metric called cohesion to justify our claims. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. When we write or prepare to write a research paper, we always have appropriate references in mind. However, there are most likely references we have missed and should have been read and cited. As such a good citation recommendation system would not only improve our paper but, overall, the efficiency and quality of literature search. Usually, a citation's context contains explicit words explaining the citation. Using this, we propose a method that "translates" research papers into references. By considering the citations and their contexts from existing papers as parallel data written in two different "languages", we adopt the translation model to create a relationship between these two "vocabularies". Experiments on both CiteSeer and CiteULike dataset show that our approach outperforms other baseline methods and increase the precision, recall and f-measure by at least 5 to 10 , respectively. In addition, our approach runs much faster in the both training and recommending stage, which proves the effectiveness and the scalability of our work. Summarization mainly provides the major topics or theme of document in limited number of words. However, in extract summary we depend upon extracted sentences, while in abstract summary, each summary sentence may contain concise information from multiple sentences. The major facts which affect the quality of summary are: (1) the way of handling noisy or less important terms in document, (2) utilizing information content of terms in document (as, each term may have different levels of importance in document) and (3) finally, the way to identify the appropriate thematic facts in the form of summary. To reduce the effect of noisy terms and to utilize the information content of terms in the document, we introduce the graph theoretical model populated with semantic and statistical importance of terms. Next, we introduce the concept of weighted minimum vertex cover which helps us in identifying the most representative and thematic facts in the document. Additionally, to generate abstract summary, we introduce the use of vertex constrained shortest path based technique, which uses minimum vertex cover related information as valuable resource. Our experimental results on DUC-2001 and DUC-2002 dataset show that our devised system performs better than baseline systems. Researchers and scientists increasingly find themselves in the position of having to quickly understand large amounts of technical material. Our goal is to effectively serve this need by using bibliometric text mining and summarization techniques to generate summaries of scientific literature. We show how we can use citations to produce automatically generated, readily consumable, technical extractive summaries. We first propose C-LexRank, a model for summarizing single scientific articles based on citations, which employs community detection and extracts salient information-rich sentences. Next, we further extend our experiments to summarize a set of papers, which cover the same scienti fic topic. We generate extractive summaries of a set of Question Answering (QA) and Dependency Parsing (DP) papers, their abstracts, and their citation sentences and show that citations have unique information amenable to creating a summary. In a scientific work, an abstract always contains main information of an article including at least a researched problem, aim(s), methodology, and result of the study. Writing an abstract requires a conscientious analysis since the contents would affect both the readers’ interestedness and disinterestedness on a particular or overall research topic. However, people generally write manually by summarizing the article. The aim of this study is constructing automation for summarizing Indonesian articles as an alternative approach to an abstract. This is involving two methods to summarize an article. A Term Frequency-inverse Document Frequency is used to get a keyword and weight terms, and a Vector Space Model is utilized to represent abstract text into a vector that used to identify the linkage of documents. From this method, the result of the summary can be generated from documents. Supporting this research, we used several journal articles written by a manual abstract. The results of this application show that the automatic summarization produces a paragraph which consists of more than three same sentences constantly as compared to manual paragraphing. Citation relationship between scientific publications has been successfully used for scholarly bibliometrics, information retrieval and data mining tasks, and citation-based recommendation algorithms are well documented. While previous studies investigated citation relations from various viewpoints, most of them share the same assumption that, if paper1 cites paper2 (or author1 cites author2), they are connected, regardless of citation importance, sentiment, reason, topic, or motivation. However, this assumption is oversimplified. In this study, we employ an innovative "context-rich heterogeneous network" approach, which paves a new way for citation recommendation task. In the network, we characterize 1) the importance of citation relationships between citing and cited papers, and 2) the topical citation motivation. Unlike earlier studies, the citation information, in this paper, is characterized by citation textual contexts extracted from the full-text citing paper. We also propose algorithm to cope with the situation when large portion of full-text missing information exists in the bibliographic repository. Evaluation results show that, context-rich heterogeneous network can significantly enhance the citation recommendation performance. Abstractive summarization aims to generate a shorter version of the document covering all the salient points in a compact and coherent fashion. On the other hand, query-based summarization highlights those points that are relevant in the context of a given query. The encode-attend-decode paradigm has achieved notable success in machine translation, extractive summarization, dialog systems, etc. But it suffers from the drawback of generation of repeated phrases. In this work we propose a model for the query-based summarization task based on the encode-attend-decode paradigm with two key additions (i) a query attention model (in addition to document attention model) which learns to focus on different portions of the query at different time steps (instead of using a static representation for the query) and (ii) a new diversity based attention model which aims to alleviate the problem of repeating phrases in the summary. In order to enable the testing of this model we introduce a new query-based summarization dataset building on debatepedia. Our experiments show that with these two additions the proposed model clearly outperforms vanilla encode-attend-decode models with a gain of 28 (absolute) in ROUGE-L scores. Scientists continue to find challenges in the ever increasing amount of information that has been produced on a world wide scale, during the last decades. When writing a paper, an author searches for the most relevant citations that started or were the foundation of a particular topic, which would very likely explain the thinking or algorithms that are employed. The search is usually done using specific keywords submitted to literature search engines such as Google Scholar and CiteSeer. However, finding relevant citations is distinctive from producing articles that are only topically similar to an author's proposal. In this paper, we address the problem of citation recommendation using a singular value decomposition approach. The models are trained and evaluated on the Citeseer digital library. The results of our experiments show that the proposed approach achieves significant success when compared with collaborative filtering methods on the citation recommendation task. Citation recommendation is an interesting but challenging research problem. Most existing studies assume that all papers adopt the same criterion and follow the same behavioral pattern in deciding relevance and authority of a paper. However, in reality, papers have distinct citation behavioral patterns when looking for different references, depending on paper content, authors and target venues. In this study, we investigate the problem in the context of heterogeneous bibliographic networks and propose a novel cluster-based citation recommendation framework, called ClusCite, which explores the principle that citations tend to be softly clustered into interest groups based on multiple types of relationships in the network. Therefore, we predict each query's citations based on related interest groups, each having its own model for paper authority and relevance. Specifically, we learn group memberships for objects and the significance of relevance features for each interest group, while also propagating relative authority between objects, by solving a joint optimization problem. Experiments on both DBLP and PubMed datasets demonstrate the power of the proposed approach, with 17.68 improvement in Recall@50 and 9.57 growth in MRR over the best performing baseline. An analysis of three major problems in the application of bibliometric research performance indicators is made in three separate sections. In the first section, the influence of field-dependent citation practices is analysed. The results indicate that rankings of publications from different fields, based on citation counts, can be affected seriously by differences between citation characteristics in those fields. If certain assumptions hold, one should expect high (short term) citation levels in Biochemistry, Celbiology and Biophysics. Medium citation levels are to be expected in Experimental and Molecular Physics, Physical and Organic Chemistry, Pharmacology and Plant Physiology, and low citation levels in Mathematics, Taxonomy, Pharmacognosy and Inorganic Solid State Chemistry. In the second section time-dependent factors are studied. It is shown that trend-analyses of output and impact based on bibliometric scores can be disturbed by changes in theSCI-database and in publication and citation practices. One of the disturbing factors is shown to be the inclusion of so called Books into theSCI data-base in 1977. Finally, in the third section a case is presented which illustrates the consequences of operating on incomplete bibliometric data in the evaluation of scientific performance. A completeness percentage of 99 for publication data is proposed as a standard in evaluations of the performance of small university research groups). The exploration and analysis of scientific literature collections is an important task for effective knowledge management. Past interest in such document sets has spurred the development of numerous visualization approaches for their interactive analysis. They either focus on the textual content of publications, or on document metadata including authors and citations. Previously presented approaches for citation analysis aim primarily at the visualization of the structure of citation networks and their exploration. We extend the state-of-the-art by presenting an approach for the interactive visual analysis of the contents of scientific documents, and combine it with a new and flexible technique to analyze their citations. This technique facilitates user-steered aggregation of citations which are linked to the content of the citing publications using a highly interactive visualization approach. Through enriching the approach with additional interactive views of other important aspects of the data, we support the exploration of the dataset over time and enable users to analyze citation patterns, spot trends, and track long-term developments. We demonstrate the strengths of our approach through a use case and discuss it based on expert user feedback. One of the important Natural Language Processing applications is Text Summarization, which helps users to manage the vast amount of information available, by condensing documents' content and extracting the most relevant facts or topics included. Text Summarization can be classified according to the type of summary: extractive, and abstractive. Extractive summary is the procedure of identifying important sections of the text and producing them verbatim while abstractive summary aims to produce important material in a new generalized form. In this paper, a novel approach is presented to create an abstractive summary for a single document using a rich semantic graph reducing technique. The approach summaries the input document by creating a rich semantic graph for the original document, reducing the generated graph, and then generating the abstractive summary from the reduced graph. Besides, a simulated case study is presented to show how the original text was minimized to fifty percent. Many practical tasks require accessing specific types of information in scientific literature; e.g. information about the objective, methods, results or conclusions of the study in question. Several schemes have been developed to characterize such information in full journal papers. Yet many tasks focus on abstracts instead. We take three schemes of different type and granularity (those based on section names, argumentative zones and conceptual structure of documents) and investigate their applicability to biomedical abstracts. We show that even for the finest-grained of these schemes, the majority of categories appear in abstracts and can be identified relatively reliably using machine learning. We discuss the impact of our results and the need for subsequent task-based evaluation of the schemes. Scientific papers revolve around citations, and for many discourse level tasks one needs to know whose work is being talked about at any point in the discourse. In this paper, we introduce the scientific attribution task, which links different linguistic expressions to citations. We discuss the suitability of different evaluation metrics and evaluate our classification approach to deciding attribution both intrinsically and in an extrinsic evaluation where information about scientific attribution is shown to improve performance on Argumentative Zoning, a rhetorical classification task. Abstractive text summarization aims to shorten long text documents into a human readable form that contains the most important facts from the original document. However, the level of actual abstraction as measured by novel phrases that do not appear in the source document remains low in existing approaches. We propose two techniques to improve the level of abstraction of generated summaries. First, we decompose the decoder into a contextual network that retrieves relevant parts of the source document, and a pretrained language model that incorporates prior knowledge about language generation. Second, we propose a novelty metric that is optimized directly through policy learning to encourage the generation of novel phrases. Our model achieves results comparable to state-of-the-art models, as determined by ROUGE scores and human evaluations, while achieving a significantly higher level of abstraction as measured by n-gram overlap with the source document. People often read summaries of news articles in order to get reliable information about an event or a topic. However, the information expressed in news articles is not always certain, and some sentences contain uncertain information about the event. Existing summarization systems do not consider whether a sentence in news articles is certain or not. In this paper, we propose a novel system called CTSUM to incorporate the new factor of information certainty into the summarization task. We first analyze the sentences in news articles and automatically predict the certainty levels of sentences by using the support vector regression method with a few useful features. The predicted certainty scores are then incorporated into a summarization system with a graph-based ranking algorithm. Experimental results on a manually labeled dataset verify the effectiveness of the sentence certainty prediction technique, and experimental results on the DUC2007 dataset shows that our new summarization system cannot only produce summaries with better content quality, but also produce summaries with higher certainty. In the past several years studies have started to appear comparing the accuracies of various science mapping approaches. These studies primarily compare the cluster solutions resulting from different similarity approaches, and give varying results. In this study we compare the accuracies of cluster solutions of a large corpus of 2,153,769 recent articles from the biomedical literature (2004–2008) using four similarity approaches: co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, direct citation, and a bibliographic coupling-based citation-text hybrid approach. Each of the four approaches can be considered a way to represent the research front in biomedicine, and each is able to successfully cluster over 92p of the corpus. Accuracies are compared using two metrics—within-cluster textual coherence as defined by the Jensen-Shannon divergence, and a concentration measure based on the grant-to-article linkages indexed in MEDLINE. Of the three pure citation-based approaches, bibliographic coupling slightly outperforms co-citation analysis using both accuracy measures; direct citation is the least accurate mapping approach by far. The hybrid approach improves upon the bibliographic coupling results in all respects. We consider the results of this study to be robust given the very large size of the corpus, and the specificity of the accuracy measures used. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Citations are important in academic dissemination. To help researchers check the completeness of citations while authoring a paper, we introduce a citation recommendation system called RefSeer. Researchers can use it to find related works to cited while authoring papers. It can also be used by reviewers to check the completeness of a paper's references. RefSeer presents both topic based global recommendation and also citation-context based local recommendation. By evaluating the quality of recommendation, we show that such recommendation system can recommend citations with good precision and recall. We also show that our recommendation system is very efficient and scalable. We present an approach for extractive single-document summarization. Our approach is based on a weighted graphical representation of documents obtained by topic modeling. We optimize importance, coherence and non-redundancy simultaneously using ILP. We compare ROUGE scores of our system with state-of-the-art results on scientific articles from PLOS Medicine and on DUC 2002 data. Human judges evaluate the coherence of summaries generated by our system in comparision to two baselines. Our approach obtains competitive performance.