Modeling Debate within a Scientific Community

O. Babko-Malaya, Adam Meyers, J. Pustejovsky, M. Verhagen
{"title":"Modeling Debate within a Scientific Community","authors":"O. Babko-Malaya, Adam Meyers, J. Pustejovsky, M. Verhagen","doi":"10.1109/SOCIETY.2013.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is growing interest in automating the detection and tracking of new and significant developments in science and technology, as they emerge within a given community. A significant component of detecting such patterns of emergence is identifying the presence of a debate in the scientific community. This often reflects disagreements or uncertainties over technologies or concepts as they are actively being discussed and developed. In this paper, we present an algorithm for recognizing debate in large document collections. We distinguish three distinct styles of debate over a document collection: (i) silent debate, (ii) active disagreement, and (iii) topical uncertainty. Our algorithm employs a number of indicators found in the metadata and full text of publications and patents to identify the presence of these types of debate in the community. The paper outlines the details of these features and indicators and reports on the results of applying these indicators to data from several fields classified by subject matter experts, which show that system outputs have high agreement with SME's judgments.","PeriodicalId":348108,"journal":{"name":"2013 International Conference on Social Intelligence and Technology","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 International Conference on Social Intelligence and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SOCIETY.2013.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

There is growing interest in automating the detection and tracking of new and significant developments in science and technology, as they emerge within a given community. A significant component of detecting such patterns of emergence is identifying the presence of a debate in the scientific community. This often reflects disagreements or uncertainties over technologies or concepts as they are actively being discussed and developed. In this paper, we present an algorithm for recognizing debate in large document collections. We distinguish three distinct styles of debate over a document collection: (i) silent debate, (ii) active disagreement, and (iii) topical uncertainty. Our algorithm employs a number of indicators found in the metadata and full text of publications and patents to identify the presence of these types of debate in the community. The paper outlines the details of these features and indicators and reports on the results of applying these indicators to data from several fields classified by subject matter experts, which show that system outputs have high agreement with SME's judgments.
科学界的建模辩论
人们对自动化探测和跟踪某一特定社区内出现的科学和技术的新的重大发展越来越感兴趣。检测这种出现模式的一个重要组成部分是识别科学界存在的争论。这通常反映了对正在积极讨论和发展的技术或概念的分歧或不确定性。在本文中,我们提出了一种在大型文档集合中识别辩论的算法。我们区分了三种不同的文件收集辩论风格:(i)沉默的辩论,(ii)积极的分歧,和(iii)主题的不确定性。我们的算法采用了在元数据、出版物全文和专利中发现的许多指标来识别社区中这些类型辩论的存在。本文概述了这些特征和指标的细节,并报告了将这些指标应用于由主题专家分类的几个领域的数据的结果,表明系统输出与中小企业的判断高度一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信