An effective framework for measuring the novelty of scientific articles through integrated topic modeling and cloud model

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Zhongyi Wang , Haoxuan Zhang , Jiangping Chen , Haihua Chen
{"title":"An effective framework for measuring the novelty of scientific articles through integrated topic modeling and cloud model","authors":"Zhongyi Wang ,&nbsp;Haoxuan Zhang ,&nbsp;Jiangping Chen ,&nbsp;Haihua Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2024.101587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Novelty is a critical characteristic of innovative scientific articles, and accurately identifying novelty can facilitate the early detection of scientific breakthroughs. However, existing methods for measuring novelty have two main limitations: (1) Metadata-based approaches, such as citation analysis, are retrospective and do not alleviate the pressures of the peer review process or enable timely tracking of scientific progress; (2) Content-based methods have not adequately addressed the inherent uncertainty between the qualitative concept of novelty and the textual representation of papers. To address these issues, we propose a practical and effective framework for <strong>m</strong>easuring the <strong>n</strong>ovelty of <strong>s</strong>cientific <strong>a</strong>rticles through <strong>i</strong>ntegrated <strong>t</strong>opic <strong>m</strong>odeling and <strong>c</strong>loud <strong>m</strong>odel, referred to as <strong>MNSA-ITMCM</strong>. In this framework, papers are represented as topic combinations, and novelty is reflected in the organic reorganization of these topics. We use the BERTopic model to generate semantically informed topics, and then apply a topic selection algorithm based on maximum marginal relevance to obtain a topic combination that balances similarity and diversity. Furthermore, we leverage the cloud model from fuzzy mathematics to quantify novelty, overcoming the uncertainty inherent in natural language expression and topic modeling to improve the accuracy of novelty measurement. To validate the effectiveness of our framework, we conducted empirical evaluations on papers from the Cell 2021 journal (biomedical domain) and the ICLR 2023 conference (computer science domain). Through correlation analysis and prediction error analysis, our framework demonstrated the ability to identify different types of novel papers and accurately predict their novelty levels. The proposed framework is applicable across diverse scientific disciplines and publication venues, benefiting researchers, librarians, science evaluation agencies, policymakers, and funding organizations by improving the efficiency and comprehensiveness of identifying novelty research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157724000993","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Novelty is a critical characteristic of innovative scientific articles, and accurately identifying novelty can facilitate the early detection of scientific breakthroughs. However, existing methods for measuring novelty have two main limitations: (1) Metadata-based approaches, such as citation analysis, are retrospective and do not alleviate the pressures of the peer review process or enable timely tracking of scientific progress; (2) Content-based methods have not adequately addressed the inherent uncertainty between the qualitative concept of novelty and the textual representation of papers. To address these issues, we propose a practical and effective framework for measuring the novelty of scientific articles through integrated topic modeling and cloud model, referred to as MNSA-ITMCM. In this framework, papers are represented as topic combinations, and novelty is reflected in the organic reorganization of these topics. We use the BERTopic model to generate semantically informed topics, and then apply a topic selection algorithm based on maximum marginal relevance to obtain a topic combination that balances similarity and diversity. Furthermore, we leverage the cloud model from fuzzy mathematics to quantify novelty, overcoming the uncertainty inherent in natural language expression and topic modeling to improve the accuracy of novelty measurement. To validate the effectiveness of our framework, we conducted empirical evaluations on papers from the Cell 2021 journal (biomedical domain) and the ICLR 2023 conference (computer science domain). Through correlation analysis and prediction error analysis, our framework demonstrated the ability to identify different types of novel papers and accurately predict their novelty levels. The proposed framework is applicable across diverse scientific disciplines and publication venues, benefiting researchers, librarians, science evaluation agencies, policymakers, and funding organizations by improving the efficiency and comprehensiveness of identifying novelty research.

通过综合主题建模和云模型衡量科技文章新颖性的有效框架
新颖性是创新性科学文章的一个重要特征,准确识别新颖性有助于及早发现科学突破。然而,现有的新颖性测量方法有两个主要局限:(1) 基于元数据的方法(如引文分析)是回顾性的,不能减轻同行评审过程的压力,也不能及时跟踪科学进展;(2) 基于内容的方法没有充分解决新颖性的定性概念与论文文本表述之间固有的不确定性。为了解决这些问题,我们提出了一个实用有效的框架,通过集成主题建模和云模型来衡量科学文章的新颖性,简称为 MNSA-ITMCM。在这个框架中,论文被表示为主题组合,而新颖性则反映在这些主题的有机重组上。我们使用 BERTopic 模型生成语义信息主题,然后应用基于最大边际相关性的主题选择算法来获得兼顾相似性和多样性的主题组合。此外,我们还利用模糊数学中的云模型来量化新颖性,克服了自然语言表达和话题建模中固有的不确定性,从而提高了新颖性测量的准确性。为了验证我们框架的有效性,我们对来自《细胞》2021 期刊(生物医学领域)和 ICLR 2023 会议(计算机科学领域)的论文进行了实证评估。通过相关性分析和预测误差分析,我们的框架展示了识别不同类型的新颖性论文并准确预测其新颖性水平的能力。建议的框架适用于不同的科学学科和出版场所,通过提高识别新颖性研究的效率和全面性,使研究人员、图书馆员、科学评估机构、政策制定者和资助机构从中受益。
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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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