skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: “Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames.” Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics (TACL).
Citations have long been used to characterize the state of a scientific field and to identify influential works. However, writers use citations for different purposes, and this varied purpose influences uptake by future scholars. Unfortunately, our understanding of how scholars use and frame citations has been limited to small-scale manual citation analysis of individual papers. We perform the largest behavioral study of citations to date, analyzing how scientific works frame their contributions through different types of citations and how this framing affects the field as a whole. We introduce a new dataset of nearly 2,000 citations annotated for their function, and use it to develop a state-of-the-art classifier and label the papers of an entire field: Natural Language Processing. We then show how differences in framing affect scientific uptake and reveal the evolution of the publication venues and the field as a whole. We demonstrate that authors are sensitive to discourse structure and publication venue when citing, and that how a paper frames its work through citations is predictive of the citation count it will receive. Finally, we use changes in citation framing to show that the field of NLP is undergoing a significant increase in consensus.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1633036
PAR ID:
10110065
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Date Published:
Journal Name:
TACLE
ISSN:
2648-5508
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Accurate prediction of scientific impact is important for scientists, academic recommender systems, and granting organizations alike. Existing approaches rely on many years of leading citation values to predict a scientific paper’s citations (a proxy for impact), even though most papers make their largest contributions in the first few years after they are published. In this paper, we tackle a new problem: predicting a new paper’s citation time series from the date of publication (i.e., without leading values). We propose HINTS, a novel end-to-end deep learning framework that converts citation signals from dynamic heterogeneous information networks (DHIN) into citation time series. HINTS imputes pseudo-leading values for a paper in the years before it is published from DHIN embeddings, and then transforms these embeddings into the parameters of a formal model that can predict citation counts immediately after publication. Empirical analysis on two real-world datasets from Computer Science and Physics show that HINTS is competitive with baseline citation prediction models. While we focus on citations, our approach generalizes to other “cold start” time series prediction tasks where relational data is available and accurate prediction in early timestamps is crucial. 
    more » « less
  2. Citations of scientific papers and patents reveal the knowledge flow and usually serve as the metric for evaluating their novelty and impacts in the field. Citation Forecasting thus has various applications in the real world. Existing works on citation forecasting typically exploit the sequential properties of citation events, without exploring the citation network. In this paper, we propose to explore both the citation network and the related citation event sequences which provide valuable information for future citation forecasting. We propose a novel Citation Network and Event Sequence (CINES) Model to encode signals in the citation network and related citation event sequences into various types of embeddings for decoding to the arrivals of future citations. Moreover, we propose a temporal network attention and three alternative designs of bidirectional feature propagation to aggregate the retrospective and prospective aspects of publications in the citation network, coupled with the citation event sequence embeddings learned by a two-level attention mechanism for the citation forecasting. We evaluate our models and baselines on both a U.S. patent dataset and a DBLP dataset. Experimental results show that our models outperform the state-of-the-art methods, i.e., RMTPP, CYAN-RNN, Intensity-RNN, and PC-RNN, reducing the forecasting error by 37.76% - 75.32%. 
    more » « less
  3. Searching for relevant literature is a fundamental part of academic research. The search for relevant literature is becoming a more difficult and time-consuming task as millions of articles are published each year. As a solution, recommendation systems for academic papers attempt to help researchers find relevant papers quickly. This paper focuses on graph-based recommendation systems for academic papers using citation networks. This type of paper recommendation system leverages a graph of papers linked by citations to create a list of relevant papers. In this study, we explore recommendation systems for academic papers using citation networks incorporating citation relations. We define citation relation based on the number of times the origin paper cites the reference paper, and use this citation relation to measure the strength of the relation between the papers. We created a weighted network using citation relation as citation weight on edges. We evaluate our proposed method on a real-world publication data set, and conduct an extensive comparison with three state-of-the-art baseline methods. Our results show that citation network-based recommendation systems using citation weights perform better than the current methods. 
    more » « less
  4. ABSTRACT The citation of scientific papers is considered a simple and direct indicator of papers' impact. This paper predicts papers' citations through team‐related variables, team composition, and team structure. Team composition includes team size, male/female dominance, academia/industry collaboration, unique race number, and unique country number. Team structures are made up of team power level and team power hierarchy. Team members' previous citation number, H‐index, previous collaborators, career age, and previous paper numbers are a proxy of team power. We calculated the mean value and Gini coefficient to represent team power level (the collective team capability) and team power hierarchy (the vertical difference of power distribution within a team). Taking 1,675,035 CS teams in the DBLP dataset, we trained the XGBoost model to predict high/low citation. Our model has reached 0.71 in AUC and 70.45% in accuracy rate. Utilizing Explainable AI method SHAP to evaluate features' relative importance in predicting team citation categories, we found that team structure plays a more critical role than team composition in predicting team citation. High team power level, flat team power structure, diverse race background, large team, collaboration with industry, and male‐dominated teams can bring higher team citations. Our project can provide insights into how to form the best scientific teams and maximize team impact from team composition and team structure. 
    more » « less
  5. Bolboacă, Sorana D (Ed.)
    Background and aimCitations in academia have long been regarded as a fundamental means of acknowledging the contribution of past work and promoting scientific advancement. The aim of this paper was to investigate the impact that misconduct allegations made against scholars have on the citations of their work, comparing allegations of sexual misconduct (unrelatedto the research merit) and allegations of scientific misconduct (directly relatedto the research merit). MethodsWe collected citation data from the Web of Science (WoS) in 2021, encompassing 31,941 publications from 172 accused and control scholars across 18 disciplines. We also conducted two studies: one on non-academics (N = 231) and one on academics (N = 240). ResultsThe WoS data shows that scholars accused of sexual misconduct incur a significant citation decrease in the three years after the accusations become public, while we do not detect a significant citation decrease for scholars accused of scientific misconduct. The study involving non-academics suggests that individuals are more averse to sexual than to scientific misconduct. Finally, contrary to the WoS data findings, a sample of academics indicates they are more likely to cite scholars accused of sexual misconduct than those accused of scientific misconduct. ConclusionsIn the first three years after accusations became public, scholars accused of sexual misconduct incur a larger citation penalty than scholars accused of scientific misconduct. However, when asked to predict their citing behavior, scholars indicated the reverse pattern, suggesting they might mis-predict their behavior or be reluctant to disclose their preferences. 
    more » « less