Using citations to generate surveys of scientific paradigms

NAACL HLT 2009 - Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 584-592

  Mohammad, Saif ^a,b   Dorr, Bonnie ^a,b   Egan, Melissa ^a   Hassan, Ahmed ^d   Muthukrishan, Pradeep ^d   Qazvinian, Vahed ^d   Radev, Dragomir ^d   Zajic, David ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b Johns Hopkins University   (United States)

^c Center for Advanced Study of Language   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED; CITATION INFORMATION; LARGE AMOUNTS; MULTI-DOCUMENT; SCIENTIFIC PARADIGM;

SURVEYS;

EID: 80053432092     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1620754.1620839     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Shannon Bradshaw. 2003. Reference directed indexing: Redeeming relevance for subject search in citation indexes. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries.
2. Jaime G. Carbonell and Jade Goldstein. 1998. The use of mmr, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In Proceedings of 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 335-336, Melbourne, Australia.
3. Aaron Elkiss, Siwei Shen, Anthony Fader, Güneş Erkan, David States, and Dragomir R. Radev. 2008a. Blind men and elephants: What do citation summaries tell us about a research article? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1):51-62.
4. Aaron Elkiss, Siwei Shen, Anthony Fader, Güneş Erkan, David States, and Dragomir R. Radev. 2008b. Blind men and elephants: What do citation summaries tell us about a research article? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1):51-62.
5. Güneş Erkan and Dragomir R. Radev. 2004. Lexrank: Graph-based centrality as salience in text summarization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research.
6. Wesley Hildebrandt, Boris Katz, and Jimmy Lin. 2004. Overview of the trec 2003 question-answering track. In Proceedings of the 2004 Human Language Technology Conference and the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Annual Meeting (HLT/NAACL 2004).
7. Mark Joseph and Dragomir Radev. 2007. Citation analysis, centrality, and the ACL Anthology. Technical Report CSE-TR-535-07, University of Michigan. Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.
8. Daniel Jurafsky and James H. Martin. 2008. Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Speech Recognition, and Computational Linguistics (2nd edition). Prentice-Hall.
9. Min-Yen Kan, Judith L. Klavans, and Kathleen R. McKeown. 2002. Using the Annotated Bibliography as a Resource for Indicative Summarization. In Proceedings of LREC 2002, Las Palmas, Spain.
10. Dan Klein and Christopher D. Manning. 2003. Accurate unlexicalized parsing. In Proceedings of the 41st Meeting of ACL, pages 423-430.
11. Julian Kupiec, Jan Pedersen, and Francine Chen. 1995. A trainable document summarizer. In SIGIR '95, pages 68-73, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
12. Amy Langville and Carl Meyer. 2006. Google's PageRank and Beyond: The Science of Search Engine Rankings. Princeton University Press.
13. Jimmy J. Lin and Dina Demner-Fushman. 2006. Methods for automatically evaluating answers to complex questions. Information Retrieval, 9(5):565-587.
14. Chin-Yew Lin. 2004. Rouge: A package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In Proceedings of the ACL workshop on Text Summarization Branches Out.
15. Qiaozhu Mei and ChengXiang Zhai. 2008. Generating impact-based summaries for scientific literature. In Proceedings of ACL '08, pages 816-824.
16. Preslav I. Nakov, Schwartz S. Ariel, and Hearst A. Marti. 2004. Citances: Citation sentences for semantic analysis of bioscience text. In Workshop on Search and Discovery in Bioinformatics.
17. Hidetsugu Nanba and Manabu Okumura. 1999. Towards multi-paper summarization using reference information. In IJCAI1999, pages 926-931.
18. Hidetsugu Nanba, Takeshi Abekawa, Manabu Okumura, and Suguru Saito. 2004a. Bilingual presri: Integration of multiple research paper databases. In Proceedings of RIAO 2004, pages 195-211, Avignon, France.
19. Hidetsugu Nanba, Noriko Kando, and Manabu Okumura. 2004b. Classification of research papers using citation links and citation types: Towards automatic review article generation. In Proceedings of the 11th SIG Classification Research Workshop, pages 117-134, Chicago, USA.
20. Ani Nenkova and Rebecca Passonneau. 2004. Evaluating content selection in summarization: The pyramid method. Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL conference.
21. Mark E. J. Newman. 2001. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. PNAS, 98(2):404-409.
22. Vahed Qazvinian and Dragomir R. Radev. 2008. Scientific paper summarization using citation summary networks. In COLING 2008, Manchester, UK.
23. Advaith Siddharthan and Simone Teufel. 2007. Whose idea was this, and why does it matter? attributing scientific work to citations. In Proceedings of NAACL/HLT-07.
24. Simone Teufel and Marc Moens. 2002. Summarizing scientific articles: experiments with relevance and rhetorical status. Comput. Linguist., 28(4):409-445.
25. Simone Teufel, Advaith Siddharthan, and Dan Tidhar. 2006. Automatic classification of citation function. In Proceedings of EMNLP, pages 103-110, Australia.
26. Simone Teufel. 2005. Argumentative Zoning for Improved Citation Indexing. Computing Attitude and Affect in Text: Theory and Applications, pages 159-170.
27. Ellen M. Voorhees. 2003. Overview of the trec 2003 question answering track. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Text Retrieval Conference (TREC 2003).
28. David M. Zajic, Bonnie J. Dorr, Jimmy Lin, and Richard Schwartz. 2007. Multi-candidate reduction: Sentence compression as a tool for document summarization tasks. Information Processing and Management (Special Issue on Summarization).