Difference between revisions of "Bethard cikm2010"
From Cohen Courses
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | == | + | == Citation == |
* Title : Who Should I Cite? Learning Literature Search Models from Citation Behavior | * Title : Who Should I Cite? Learning Literature Search Models from Citation Behavior | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== Model == | == Model == | ||
| − | + | Documents are ranked based on their scores. <br> | |
| + | For scoring, they used linear model between a query Q (project idea) and a document D (existing scientific article) as follows :<br><br> | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
score(Q,D) = \sum_i w_i \times f_i(Q,D) | score(Q,D) = \sum_i w_i \times f_i(Q,D) | ||
| Line 23: | Line 24: | ||
== Features == | == Features == | ||
* Terms : | * Terms : | ||
| − | ** TF-IDF | + | ** TF-IDF between Q and D |
* Citations : | * Citations : | ||
** Number of papers that cited D | ** Number of papers that cited D | ||
| Line 29: | Line 30: | ||
** Number of citations author of D has received (if there are multiple authors, use one with the most citation counts) | ** Number of citations author of D has received (if there are multiple authors, use one with the most citation counts) | ||
*** A variant using h-index instead of raw citation counts was also explored. An author with h-index h has published h papers each of which has been cited at least h times. | *** A variant using h-index instead of raw citation counts was also explored. An author with h-index h has published h papers each of which has been cited at least h times. | ||
| − | ** PageRank score calculated over the citation network (instead of the hyperlink network) | + | ** PageRank score of document collection calculated over the citation network (instead of the hyperlink network) |
* Recency: | * Recency: | ||
** current year - year D. (intuition : older papers get less scores). | ** current year - year D. (intuition : older papers get less scores). | ||
| Line 35: | Line 36: | ||
** Cosine similarity between Q and D | ** Cosine similarity between Q and D | ||
** Cosine similarity between Q and averaged topic distributions of all other documents which cited D | ** Cosine similarity between Q and averaged topic distributions of all other documents which cited D | ||
| + | ** Topic citation counts | ||
| + | ** Entropy of D's topic distribution | ||
| + | ** Entropy of documents-citing-D's mean topic distributions | ||
* Social habits | * Social habits | ||
| − | ** TF-IDF between D | + | ** TF-IDF between authors of Q and authors of D (note that this just is a TF-IDF between author lists) |
| + | ** TF-IDF between authors of Q and authors of | ||
| + | ** Authors of previously cited articles by authors of Q | ||
| + | ** | ||
== Experiments == | == Experiments == | ||
| − | Feature scores (citation counts, etc.) were log-transformed and scaled to between 0 and 1 | + | Feature scores (citation counts, etc.) were log-transformed and scaled to between 0 and 1. <br> |
| − | + | Experimented with two classifiers : | |
* Logistic regression | * Logistic regression | ||
* SVM-MAP | * SVM-MAP | ||
Revision as of 15:26, 1 April 2011
Contents
Citation
- Title : Who Should I Cite? Learning Literature Search Models from Citation Behavior
- Authors : S. Bethard and D. Jurafsky
- Venue : CIKM 2010
Summary
This paper describes a retrieval model to search relevant existing work in a collection of scientific articles. The authors claim that the model is useful when a researcher wants to conduct a new research outside his/her area of expertise and needs to get familiar with prior work in the field. The model incorporates various text and meta features and uses the citation networks to learn weights of these features.
Dataset
ACL Anthology (~11,000 papers)
Model
Documents are ranked based on their scores.
For scoring, they used linear model between a query Q (project idea) and a document D (existing scientific article) as follows :
Features
- Terms :
- TF-IDF between Q and D
- Citations :
- Number of papers that cited D
- Number of citations for articles in the venue in which D was published
- Number of citations author of D has received (if there are multiple authors, use one with the most citation counts)
- A variant using h-index instead of raw citation counts was also explored. An author with h-index h has published h papers each of which has been cited at least h times.
- PageRank score of document collection calculated over the citation network (instead of the hyperlink network)
- Recency:
- current year - year D. (intuition : older papers get less scores).
- Similar Topics (100 topics from LDA)
- Cosine similarity between Q and D
- Cosine similarity between Q and averaged topic distributions of all other documents which cited D
- Topic citation counts
- Entropy of D's topic distribution
- Entropy of documents-citing-D's mean topic distributions
- Social habits
- TF-IDF between authors of Q and authors of D (note that this just is a TF-IDF between author lists)
- TF-IDF between authors of Q and authors of
- Authors of previously cited articles by authors of Q
Experiments
Feature scores (citation counts, etc.) were log-transformed and scaled to between 0 and 1.
Experimented with two classifiers :
- Logistic regression
- SVM-MAP
Training / Dev / Test split
Results
- Mean average precision on the dev set for different classifiers (using all features)
Logistic 50/50 model downsampled the number of negative examples to be the same as the number of positive examples.
- Mean average precision on the dev and test sets using different feature sets (model : SVM-MAP)
Feature analysis
Below are weights of each feature used in the experiments
