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.
Because of this recognized importance of citation information, research has also been done on properly tagging or marking the actual citation. Powley and Dale @cite_6 give insight into recognizing text that is a citation. Siddharthan and Teufel demonstrate how this is useful in reducing the noise when comparing citation text to reference text @cite_4 . Siddharthan and Teufel also introduce scientific attribution'' which can help in discourse classification. The importance of discourse classification is further developed in @cite_9 : they were able to show how identifying the discourse facets helps produce coherent summaries.
@cite_9 @cite_4 @cite_6
2157979304 36261270 2126953195
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. A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. 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. In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. 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. 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. A new form of document coupling called co-citation is defined as the frequency with which two documents are cited together. The co-citation frequency of two scientific papers can be determined by comparing lists of citing documents in the Science Citation Index and counting identical entries. Networks of co-cited papers can be generated for specific scientific specialties, and an example is drawn from the literature of particle physics. Co-citation patterns are found to differ significantly from bibliographic coupling patterns, but to agree generally with patterns of direct citation. Clusters of co-cited papers provide a new way to study the specialty structure of science. They may provide a new approach to indexing and to the creation of SDI profiles. This article challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and journals. Using Thomson Reuters' Web of Science, the present article analyses changes in the concentration of citations received (2- and 5-year citation windows) by papers published between 1900 and 2005. Three measures of concentration are used: the percentage of papers that received at least one citation (cited papers); the percentage of papers needed to account for 20 , 50 , and 80 of the citations; and the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Classical papers are of great help for beginners to get familiar with a new research area. However, digging them out is a difficult problem. This paper proposes Claper, a novel academic recommendation system based on two proven principles: the Principle of Download Persistence and the Principle of Citation Approaching (we prove them based on real-world datasets). The principle of download persistence indicates that classical papers have few decreasing download frequencies since they were published. The principle of citation approaching indicates that a paper which cites a classical paper is likely to cite citations of that classical paper. Our experimental results based on large-scale real-world datasets illustrate Claper can effectively recommend classical papers of high quality to beginners and thus help them enter their research areas. Background The h-index has already been used by major citation databases to evaluate the academic performance of individual scientists. Although effective and simple, the h-index suffers from some drawbacks that limit its use in accurately and fairly comparing the scientific output of different researchers. These drawbacks include information loss and low resolution: the former refers to the fact that in addition to h2 citations for papers in the h-core, excess citations are completely ignored, whereas the latter means that it is common for a group of researchers to have an identical h-index. Methodology Principal Findings To solve these problems, I here propose the e-index, where e2 represents the ignored excess citations, in addition to the h2 citations for h-core papers. Citation information can be completely depicted by using the h-index together with the e-index, which are independent of each other. Some other h-type indices, such as a and R, are h-dependent, have information redundancy with h, and therefore, when used together with h, mask the real differences in excess citations of different researchers. Conclusions Significance Although simple, the e-index is a necessary h-index complement, especially for evaluating highly cited scientists or for precisely comparing the scientific output of a group of scientists having an identical h-index. Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60] Historically, papers have been physically bound to the journal in which they were published; but in the digital age papers are available individually, no longer tied to their respective journals. Hence, papers now can be read and cited based on their own merits, independently of the journal's physical availability, reputation, or impact factor (IF). We compare the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' IFs. However, since 1990, the advent of the digital age, the relation between IFs and paper citations has been weakening. This began first in physics, a field that was quick to make the transition into the electronic domain. Furthermore, since 1990 the overall proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing and, of these highly cited papers, the proportion not coming from highly cited journals has been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... 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. In this paper we describe experiments conducted for CLEF- IP 2011 Prior Art Retrieval track. We examined the impact of 1) us- ing key phrase extraction to generate queries from input patent and 2) the use of citation network and (International Patent Classification) IPC class vector in ranking patents. Variations of a popular key phrase extrac- tion technique were explored for extracting and scoring terms of query patent. These terms are used as queries to retrieve similar patents. In the second approach, we use a two stage retrieval model to find similar patents. Each patent is represented as an IPC class vector. Citation net- work of patents is used to propagate these vectors from a node (patent) to its neighbors (cited patents). Similar patents are found by comparing query vector with vectors of patents in the corpus. Text based search is used to re-rank this solution set to improve precision. Two-stage sys- tem is used to retrieve and rank patents. Finally, we also extract and add citations present within the text of a query patent to the result set. Adding these citations (present in query patent text) to the results shows significant improvement in Mean Average Precision (MAP). In recent years scholars have built maps of science by connecting the academic fields that cite each other, are cited together, or that cite a similar literature. But since scholars cannot always publish in the fields they cite, or that cite them, these science maps are only rough proxies for the potential of a scholar, organization, or country, to enter a new academic field. Here we use a large dataset of scholarly publications disambiguated at the individual level to create a map of science-or research space-where links connect pairs of fields based on the probability that an individual has published in both of them. We find that the research space is a significantly more accurate predictor of the fields that individuals and organizations will enter in the future than citation based science maps. At the country level, however, the research space and citations based science maps are equally accurate. These findings show that data on career trajectories-the set of fields that individuals have previously published in-provide more accurate predictors of future research output for more focalized units-such as individuals or organizations-than citation based science maps. Social life coalesces into communities through cooperation and conflict. As a case in point, Shwed and Bearman (2010) studied consensus and contention in scientific communities. They used a sophisticated modularity method to detect communities on the basis of scientific citations, which they then interpreted as directed positive network ties. They assumed that a lack of citations implies disagreement. Some scientific citations, however, are contentious and should therefore be represented by negative ties, like conflicting relations in general. After expanding the modularity method to incorporate negative ties, we show that a small proportion of negative ties, commonly present in science, is sufficient to significantly alter the community structure. In addition, our research suggests that without distinguishing negative ties, scientific communities actually represent specialized subfields, not contentious groups. Finally, we cast doubt on the assumption that lack of cites would signal disagreement. To show the general importance of discerning negative ties for understanding conflict and its impact on communities, we also analyze a public debate. In this work, we address the problem of joint modeling of text and citations in the topic modeling framework. We present two different models called the Pairwise-Link-LDA and the Link-PLSA-LDA models. The Pairwise-Link-LDA model combines the ideas of LDA [4] and Mixed Membership Block Stochastic Models [1] and allows modeling arbitrary link structure. However, the model is computationally expensive, since it involves modeling the presence or absence of a citation (link) between every pair of documents. The second model solves this problem by assuming that the link structure is a bipartite graph. As the name indicates, Link-PLSA-LDA model combines the LDA and PLSA models into a single graphical model. Our experiments on a subset of Citeseer data show that both these models are able to predict unseen data better than the baseline model of Erosheva and Lafferty [8], by capturing the notion of topical similarity between the contents of the cited and citing documents. Our experiments on two different data sets on the link prediction task show that the Link-PLSA-LDA model performs the best on the citation prediction task, while also remaining highly scalable. In addition, we also present some interesting visualizations generated by each of the models. 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 popular h-index used to measure scientific output can be described in terms of a pool of evaluated objects (the papers), a quality function on the evaluated objects (the number of citations received by each paper) and a sentencing line crossing the origin, whose intersection with the graph of the quality function yields the index value (in the h-index this is a line with slope 1). Based on this abstraction, we present a new index, the c-index, in which the evaluated objects are the citations received by an author, a group of authors, a journal, etc., the quality function of a citation is the collaboration distance between the authors of the cited and the citing papers, and the sentencing line can take slopes between 0 and ∞. As a result, the new index counts only those citations which are significant enough, where significance is proportional to collaboration distance. Several advantages of the new c-index with respect to previous proposals are discussed.