is one of the core editing principles in Wikipedia, editors being encouraged to provide citations for the added content. For a Wikipedia article, determining the of a citation, i.e. what content is covered by a citation, is important as it helps decide for which content citations are still missing. We are the first to address the problem of determining the in Wikipedia articles. We approach this problem by classifying which textual fragments in an article are covered by a citation. We propose a sequence classification approach where for a paragraph and a citation, we determine the citation span at a fine-grained level. We provide a thorough experimental evaluation and compare our approach against baselines adopted from the scientific domain, where we show improvement for all evaluation metrics.
One of the first attempts to determine the citation span in text @cite_11 was carried out in the context of document retrieval. The citing statements from a document were used as an index to retrieve the document. The citing statements are extracted based on heuristics starting from the citing sentence and are expanded with sentences in a window of + -2 sentences, depending on them containing cue words like . We consider the approach in @cite_11 as a baseline.
@cite_11
2122778642 2008479441 1975998118 2100612254
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. Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . Abstract One of the most important problems in information retrieval is determining the order of documents in the answer returned to the user. Many methods and algorithms for document ordering have been proposed. The method introduced in this paper differs from them especially in that it uses a probabilistic model of a document set. In this model documents are regarded as states of a Markov chain, where transition probabilities are directly proportional to similarities between documents. Steady-state probabilities reflect similarities of particular documents to the whole answer set. If documents are ordered according to these probabilities, at the top of a list there will be documents that are the best representatives of the set, and at the bottom those which are the worst representatives. The method was tested against databases INSPEC and Networked Computer Science Technical Reference Library (NCSTRL). Test results are positive. Values of the Kendall rank correlation coefficient indicate high similarity between rankings generated by the proposed method and rankings produced by experts. Results are comparable with rankings generated by the vector model using standard weighting schema tf·idf. Some large scale topical digital libraries, such as CiteSeer, harvest online academic documents by crawling open-access archives, university and author homepages, and authors' self-submissions. While these approaches have so far built reasonable size libraries, they can suffer from having only a portion of the documents from specific publishing venues. We propose to use alternative online resources and techniques that maximally exploit other resources to build the complete document collection of any given publication venue. We investigate the feasibility of using publication metadata to guide the crawler towards authors' homepages to harvest what is missing from a digital library collection. We collect a real-world dataset from two Computer Science publishing venues, involving a total of 593 unique authors over a time frame of 1998 to 2004. We then identify the missing papers that are not indexed by CiteSeer. Using a fully automatic heuristic-based system that has the capability of locating authors' homepages and then using focused crawling to download the desired papers, we demonstrate that it is practical to harvest using a focused crawler academic papers that are missing from our digital library. Our harvester achieves a performance with an average recall level of 0.82 overall and 0.75 for those missing documents. Evaluation of the crawler's performance based on the harvest rate shows definite advantages over other crawling approaches and consistently outperforms a defined baseline crawler on a number of measures