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
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.