Skip to main content
Cornell University
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arxiv logo > cs > arXiv:1802.01168

Help | Advanced Search

arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

quick links

  • Login
  • Help Pages
  • About

Computer Science > Digital Libraries

arXiv:1802.01168 (cs)
[Submitted on 4 Feb 2018 (v1), last revised 19 Apr 2018 (this version, v3)]

Title:Machine Learning vs. Rules and Out-of-the-Box vs. Retrained: An Evaluation of Open-Source Bibliographic Reference and Citation Parsers

Authors:Dominika Tkaczyk, Andrew Collins, Paraic Sheridan, Joeran Beel
View a PDF of the paper titled Machine Learning vs. Rules and Out-of-the-Box vs. Retrained: An Evaluation of Open-Source Bibliographic Reference and Citation Parsers, by Dominika Tkaczyk and 3 other authors
View PDF
Abstract:Bibliographic reference parsing refers to extracting machine-readable metadata, such as the names of the authors, the title, or journal name, from bibliographic reference strings. Many approaches to this problem have been proposed so far, including regular expressions, knowledge bases and supervised machine learning. Many open source reference parsers based on various algorithms are also available. In this paper, we apply, evaluate and compare ten reference parsing tools in a specific business use case. The tools are Anystyle-Parser, Biblio, CERMINE, Citation, Citation-Parser, GROBID, ParsCit, PDFSSA4MET, Reference Tagger and Science Parse, and we compare them in both their out-of-the-box versions and versions tuned to the project-specific data. According to our evaluation, the best performing out-of-the-box tool is GROBID (F1 0.89), followed by CERMINE (F1 0.83) and ParsCit (F1 0.75). We also found that even though machine learning-based tools and tools based on rules or regular expressions achieve on average similar precision (0.77 for ML-based tools vs. 0.76 for non-ML-based tools), applying machine learning-based tools results in a recall three times higher than in the case of non-ML-based tools (0.66 vs. 0.22). Our study also confirms that tuning the models to the task-specific data results in the increase in the quality. The retrained versions of reference parsers are in all cases better than their out-of-the-box counterparts; for GROBID F1 increased by 3% (0.92 vs. 0.89), for CERMINE by 11% (0.92 vs. 0.83), and for ParsCit by 16% (0.87 vs. 0.75).
Comments: to appear in Proceedings of Joint Conference on Digital Libraries 2018
Subjects: Digital Libraries (cs.DL)
Cite as: arXiv:1802.01168 [cs.DL]
  (or arXiv:1802.01168v3 [cs.DL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1802.01168
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Dominika Tkaczyk [view email]
[v1] Sun, 4 Feb 2018 18:01:00 UTC (991 KB)
[v2] Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:44:33 UTC (582 KB)
[v3] Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:26:32 UTC (582 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Machine Learning vs. Rules and Out-of-the-Box vs. Retrained: An Evaluation of Open-Source Bibliographic Reference and Citation Parsers, by Dominika Tkaczyk and 3 other authors
  • View PDF
  • Other Formats
view license
Current browse context:
cs
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2018-02
Change to browse by:
cs.DL

References & Citations

  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar

DBLP - CS Bibliography

listing | bibtex
Dominika Tkaczyk
Andrew Collins
Paraic Sheridan
Jöran Beel
a export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
  • About
  • Help
  • contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact
  • subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Web Accessibility Assistance
  • arXiv Operational Status
    Get status notifications via email or slack