SC4ANM: Identifying optimal section combinations for automated novelty prediction in academic papers

IF 7.5 1区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Wenqing Wu, Chengzhi Zhang, Tong Bao, Yi Zhao
{"title":"SC4ANM: Identifying optimal section combinations for automated novelty prediction in academic papers","authors":"Wenqing Wu,&nbsp;Chengzhi Zhang,&nbsp;Tong Bao,&nbsp;Yi Zhao","doi":"10.1016/j.eswa.2025.126778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Novelty is a core component of academic papers, and there are multiple perspectives on the assessment of novelty. Existing methods often focus on word or entity combinations, which provide limited insights. The content related to a paper’s novelty is typically distributed across different core sections, e.g., Introduction, Methodology and Results. Therefore, exploring the optimal combination of sections for evaluating the novelty of a paper is important for advancing automated novelty assessment. In this paper, we utilize different combinations of sections from academic papers as inputs to drive language models to predict novelty scores. We then analyze the results to determine the optimal section combinations for novelty score prediction. We first employ natural language processing techniques to identify the sectional structure of academic papers, categorizing them into introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD). Subsequently, we used different combinations of these sections (e.g., introduction and methods) as inputs for pretrained language models (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs), employing novelty scores provided by human expert reviewers as ground truth labels to obtain prediction results. The results indicate that using introduction, results and discussion is most appropriate for assessing the novelty of a paper, while the use of the entire text does not yield significant results. Furthermore, based on the results of the PLMs and LLMs, the introduction and results appear to be the most important section for the task of novelty score prediction. The code and dataset for this paper can be accessed at <span><span>https://github.com/njust-winchy/SC4ANM</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50461,"journal":{"name":"Expert Systems with Applications","volume":"273 ","pages":"Article 126778"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Systems with Applications","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417425004002","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Novelty is a core component of academic papers, and there are multiple perspectives on the assessment of novelty. Existing methods often focus on word or entity combinations, which provide limited insights. The content related to a paper’s novelty is typically distributed across different core sections, e.g., Introduction, Methodology and Results. Therefore, exploring the optimal combination of sections for evaluating the novelty of a paper is important for advancing automated novelty assessment. In this paper, we utilize different combinations of sections from academic papers as inputs to drive language models to predict novelty scores. We then analyze the results to determine the optimal section combinations for novelty score prediction. We first employ natural language processing techniques to identify the sectional structure of academic papers, categorizing them into introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD). Subsequently, we used different combinations of these sections (e.g., introduction and methods) as inputs for pretrained language models (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs), employing novelty scores provided by human expert reviewers as ground truth labels to obtain prediction results. The results indicate that using introduction, results and discussion is most appropriate for assessing the novelty of a paper, while the use of the entire text does not yield significant results. Furthermore, based on the results of the PLMs and LLMs, the introduction and results appear to be the most important section for the task of novelty score prediction. The code and dataset for this paper can be accessed at https://github.com/njust-winchy/SC4ANM.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Systems with Applications
Expert Systems with Applications 工程技术-工程:电子与电气
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
10.60%
发文量
2045
审稿时长
8.7 months
期刊介绍: Expert Systems With Applications is an international journal dedicated to the exchange of information on expert and intelligent systems used globally in industry, government, and universities. The journal emphasizes original papers covering the design, development, testing, implementation, and management of these systems, offering practical guidelines. It spans various sectors such as finance, engineering, marketing, law, project management, information management, medicine, and more. The journal also welcomes papers on multi-agent systems, knowledge management, neural networks, knowledge discovery, data mining, and other related areas, excluding applications to military/defense systems.
×
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