Adilson Vital Jr., Filipi N. Silva, Osvaldo N. Oliveira Jr., Diego R. Amancio
{"title":"Predicting citation impact of research papers using GPT and other text embeddings","authors":"Adilson Vital Jr., Filipi N. Silva, Osvaldo N. Oliveira Jr., Diego R. Amancio","doi":"arxiv-2407.19942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The impact of research papers, typically measured in terms of citation\ncounts, depends on several factors, including the reputation of the authors,\njournals, and institutions, in addition to the quality of the scientific work.\nIn this paper, we present an approach that combines natural language processing\nand machine learning to predict the impact of papers in a specific journal. Our\nfocus is on the text, which should correlate with impact and the topics covered\nin the research. We employed a dataset of over 40,000 articles from ACS Applied\nMaterials and Interfaces spanning from 2012 to 2022. The data was processed\nusing various text embedding techniques and classified with supervised machine\nlearning algorithms. Papers were categorized into the top 20% most cited within\nthe journal, using both yearly and cumulative citation counts as metrics. Our\nanalysis reveals that the method employing generative pre-trained transformers\n(GPT) was the most efficient for embedding, while the random forest algorithm\nexhibited the best predictive power among the machine learning algorithms. An\noptimized accuracy of 80\\% in predicting whether a paper was among the top 20%\nmost cited was achieved for the cumulative citation count when abstracts were\nprocessed. This accuracy is noteworthy, considering that author, institution,\nand early citation pattern information were not taken into account. The\naccuracy increased only slightly when the full texts of the papers were\nprocessed. Also significant is the finding that a simpler embedding technique,\nterm frequency-inverse document frequency (TFIDF), yielded performance close to\nthat of GPT. Since TFIDF captures the topics of the paper we infer that, apart\nfrom considering author and institution biases, citation counts for the\nconsidered journal may be predicted by identifying topics and \"reading\" the\nabstract of a paper.","PeriodicalId":501285,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Digital Libraries","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Digital Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2407.19942","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The impact of research papers, typically measured in terms of citation
counts, depends on several factors, including the reputation of the authors,
journals, and institutions, in addition to the quality of the scientific work.
In this paper, we present an approach that combines natural language processing
and machine learning to predict the impact of papers in a specific journal. Our
focus is on the text, which should correlate with impact and the topics covered
in the research. We employed a dataset of over 40,000 articles from ACS Applied
Materials and Interfaces spanning from 2012 to 2022. The data was processed
using various text embedding techniques and classified with supervised machine
learning algorithms. Papers were categorized into the top 20% most cited within
the journal, using both yearly and cumulative citation counts as metrics. Our
analysis reveals that the method employing generative pre-trained transformers
(GPT) was the most efficient for embedding, while the random forest algorithm
exhibited the best predictive power among the machine learning algorithms. An
optimized accuracy of 80\% in predicting whether a paper was among the top 20%
most cited was achieved for the cumulative citation count when abstracts were
processed. This accuracy is noteworthy, considering that author, institution,
and early citation pattern information were not taken into account. The
accuracy increased only slightly when the full texts of the papers were
processed. Also significant is the finding that a simpler embedding technique,
term frequency-inverse document frequency (TFIDF), yielded performance close to
that of GPT. Since TFIDF captures the topics of the paper we infer that, apart
from considering author and institution biases, citation counts for the
considered journal may be predicted by identifying topics and "reading" the
abstract of a paper.