More Like this

1. “Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames.” Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics (TACL).

   Jurgens, David ( January 2018 , TACLE)

   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
2. Revisiting Citation Prediction with Cluster-Aware Text-Enhanced Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks

   https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE55515.2023.00058  

   Yang, Carl ; Han, Jiawei ( April 2023 , IEEE)

   Proc. of 2023 IEEE 39th International Conference on Data Engineering (Ed.)

   Numerous papers get published all the time. However, some papers are born to be well-cited while others are not. In this work, we revisit the important problem of citation prediction, by focusing on the important yet realistic prediction on the average number of citations a paper will attract per year. The task is nonetheless challenging because many correlated factors underlie the potential impact of a paper, such as the prestige of its authors, the authority of its publishing venue, and the significance of the problems/techniques/applications it studies. To jointly model these factors, we propose to construct a heterogeneous publication network of nodes including papers, authors, venues, and terms. Moreover, we devise a novel heterogeneous graph neural network (HGN) to jointly embed all types of nodes and links, towards the modeling of research impact and its propagation. Beyond graph heterogeneity, we find it also important to consider the latent research domains, because the same nodes can have different impacts within different communities. Therefore, we further devise a novel cluster-aware (CA) module, which models all nodes and their interactions under the proper contexts of research domains. Finally, to exploit the information-rich texts associated with papers, we devise a novel text-enhancing (TE) module for automatic quality term mining. With the real-world publication data of DBLP, we construct three different networks and conduct comprehensive experiments to evaluate our proposed CATE-HGN framework, against various state-of-the-art models. Rich quantitative results and qualitative case studies demonstrate the superiority of CATEHGN in citation prediction on publication networks, and indicate its general advantages in various relevant downstream tasks on text-rich heterogeneous networks. 

   more » « less
3. What Do We Mean by “Accessibility Research”?: A Literature Survey of Accessibility Papers in CHI and ASSETS from 1994 to 2019

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445412  

   Mack, Kelly ; McDonnell, Emma ; Jain, Dhruv ; Lu Wang, Lucy ; E. Froehlich, Jon ; Findlater, Leah ( May 2021 , Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '21))

   Accessibility research has grown substantially in the past few decades, yet there has been no literature review of the field. To understand current and historical trends, we created and analyzed a dataset of accessibility papers appearing at CHI and ASSETS since ASSETS’ founding in 1994. We qualitatively coded areas of focus and methodological decisions for the past 10 years (2010-2019, N=506 papers), and analyzed paper counts and keywords over the full 26 years (N=836 papers). Our findings highlight areas that have received disproportionate attention and those that are underserved—for example, over 43% of papers in the past 10 years are on accessibility for blind and low vision people. We also capture common study characteristics, such as the roles of disabled and nondisabled participants as well as sample sizes (e.g., a median of 13 for participant groups with disabilities and older adults). We close by critically reflecting on gaps in the literature and offering guidance for future work in the field. 

   more » « less
4. Paper Recommendation Based on Citation Relation

   https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData47090.2019.9006200  

   Tanner, William ; Akbas, Esra ( January 2019 , IEEE International Conference on Big Data)

   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
5. Explaining and predicting the impact of authors within a community: an assessment of the bibliometric literature and application of machine learning

   https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtz042  

   Chai, Sen ; D’Amour, Alexander ; Fleming, Lee ( July 2019 , Industrial and Corporate Change)

   Following widespread availability of computerized databases, much research has correlated bibliometric measures from papers or patents to subsequent success, typically measured as the number of publications or citations. Building on this large body of work, we ask the following questions: given available bibliometric information in one year, along with the combined theories on sources of creative breakthroughs from the literatures on creativity and innovation, how accurately can we explain the impact of authors in a given research community in the following year? In particular, who is most likely to publish, publish highly cited work, and even publish a highly cited outlier? And, how accurately can these existing theories predict breakthroughs using only contemporaneous data? After reviewing and synthesizing (often competing) theories from the literatures, we simultaneously model the collective hypotheses based on available data in the year before RNA interference was discovered. We operationalize author impact using publication count, forward citations, and the more stringent definition of being in the top decile of the citation distribution. Explanatory power of current theories altogether ranges from less than 9% for being top cited to 24% for productivity. Machine learning (ML) methods yield similar findings as the explanatory linear models, and tangible improvement only for non-linear Support Vector Machine models. We also perform predictions using only existing data until 1997, and find lower predictability than using explanatory models. We conclude with an agenda for future progress in the bibliometric study of creativity and look forward to ML research that can explain its models.

    

   more » « less