-
LongEval at CLEF 2025: Longitudinal Evaluation of IR Model Performance
Authors:
Matteo Cancellieri,
Alaa El-Ebshihy,
Tobias Fink,
Petra Galuščáková,
Gabriela Gonzalez-Saez,
Lorraine Goeuriot,
David Iommi,
Jüri Keller,
Petr Knoth,
Philippe Mulhem,
Florina Piroi,
David Pride,
Philipp Schaer
Abstract:
This paper presents the third edition of the LongEval Lab, part of the CLEF 2025 conference, which continues to explore the challenges of temporal persistence in Information Retrieval (IR). The lab features two tasks designed to provide researchers with test data that reflect the evolving nature of user queries and document relevance over time. By evaluating how model performance degrades as test…
▽ More
This paper presents the third edition of the LongEval Lab, part of the CLEF 2025 conference, which continues to explore the challenges of temporal persistence in Information Retrieval (IR). The lab features two tasks designed to provide researchers with test data that reflect the evolving nature of user queries and document relevance over time. By evaluating how model performance degrades as test data diverge temporally from training data, LongEval seeks to advance the understanding of temporal dynamics in IR systems. The 2025 edition aims to engage the IR and NLP communities in addressing the development of adaptive models that can maintain retrieval quality over time in the domains of web search and scientific retrieval.
△ Less
Submitted 11 March, 2025;
originally announced March 2025.
-
Making Software FAIR: A machine-assisted workflow for the research software lifecycle
Authors:
Petr Knoth,
Laurent Romary,
Patrice Lopez,
Roberto Di Cosmo,
Pavel Smrz,
Tomasz Umerle,
Melissa Harrison,
Alain Monteil,
Matteo Cancellieri,
David Pride
Abstract:
A key issue hindering discoverability, attribution and reusability of open research software is that its existence often remains hidden within the manuscript of research papers. For these resources to become first-class bibliographic records, they first need to be identified and subsequently registered with persistent identifiers (PIDs) to be made FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reus…
▽ More
A key issue hindering discoverability, attribution and reusability of open research software is that its existence often remains hidden within the manuscript of research papers. For these resources to become first-class bibliographic records, they first need to be identified and subsequently registered with persistent identifiers (PIDs) to be made FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable). To this day, much open research software fails to meet FAIR principles and software resources are mostly not explicitly linked from the manuscripts that introduced them or used them. SoFAIR is a 2-year international project (2024-2025) which proposes a solution to the above problem realised over the content available through the global network of open repositories. SoFAIR will extend the capabilities of widely used open scholarly infrastructures (CORE, Software Heritage, HAL) and tools (GROBID) operated by the consortium partners, delivering and deploying an effective solution for the management of the research software lifecycle, including: 1) ML-assisted identification of research software assets from within the manuscripts of scholarly papers, 2) validation of the identified assets by authors, 3) registration of software assets with PIDs and their archival.
△ Less
Submitted 8 January, 2025;
originally announced January 2025.
-
CORE-GPT: Combining Open Access research and large language models for credible, trustworthy question answering
Authors:
David Pride,
Matteo Cancellieri,
Petr Knoth
Abstract:
In this paper, we present CORE-GPT, a novel question-answering platform that combines GPT-based language models and more than 32 million full-text open access scientific articles from CORE. We first demonstrate that GPT3.5 and GPT4 cannot be relied upon to provide references or citations for generated text. We then introduce CORE-GPT which delivers evidence-based answers to questions, along with c…
▽ More
In this paper, we present CORE-GPT, a novel question-answering platform that combines GPT-based language models and more than 32 million full-text open access scientific articles from CORE. We first demonstrate that GPT3.5 and GPT4 cannot be relied upon to provide references or citations for generated text. We then introduce CORE-GPT which delivers evidence-based answers to questions, along with citations and links to the cited papers, greatly increasing the trustworthiness of the answers and reducing the risk of hallucinations. CORE-GPT's performance was evaluated on a dataset of 100 questions covering the top 20 scientific domains in CORE, resulting in 100 answers and links to 500 relevant articles. The quality of the provided answers and and relevance of the links were assessed by two annotators. Our results demonstrate that CORE-GPT can produce comprehensive and trustworthy answers across the majority of scientific domains, complete with links to genuine, relevant scientific articles.
△ Less
Submitted 6 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Peer review and citation data in predicting university rankings, a large-scale analysis
Authors:
David Pride,
Petr Knoth
Abstract:
Most Performance-based Research Funding Systems (PRFS) draw on peer review and bibliometric indicators, two different methodologies which are sometimes combined. A common argument against the use of indicators in such research evaluation exercises is their low correlation at the article level with peer review judgments. In this study, we analyse 191,000 papers from 154 higher education institutes…
▽ More
Most Performance-based Research Funding Systems (PRFS) draw on peer review and bibliometric indicators, two different methodologies which are sometimes combined. A common argument against the use of indicators in such research evaluation exercises is their low correlation at the article level with peer review judgments. In this study, we analyse 191,000 papers from 154 higher education institutes which were peer reviewed in a national research evaluation exercise. We combine these data with 6.95 million citations to the original papers. We show that when citation-based indicators are applied at the institutional or departmental level, rather than at the level of individual papers, surprisingly large correlations with peer review judgments can be observed, up to r <= 0.802, n = 37, p < 0.001 for some disciplines. In our evaluation of ranking prediction performance based on citation data, we show we can reduce the mean rank prediction error by 25% compared to previous work. This suggests that citation-based indicators are sufficiently aligned with peer review results at the institutional level to be used to lessen the overall burden of peer review on national evaluation exercises leading to considerable cost savings.
△ Less
Submitted 22 May, 2018;
originally announced May 2018.
-
Incidental or influential? - Challenges in automatically detecting citation importance using publication full texts
Authors:
David Pride,
Petr Knoth
Abstract:
This work looks in depth at several studies that have attempted to automate the process of citation importance classification based on the publications full text. We analyse a range of features that have been previously used in this task. Our experimental results confirm that the number of in text references are highly predictive of influence. Contrary to the work of Valenzuela et al. we find abst…
▽ More
This work looks in depth at several studies that have attempted to automate the process of citation importance classification based on the publications full text. We analyse a range of features that have been previously used in this task. Our experimental results confirm that the number of in text references are highly predictive of influence. Contrary to the work of Valenzuela et al. we find abstract similarity one of the most predictive features. Overall, we show that many of the features previously described in literature are not particularly predictive. Consequently, we discuss challenges and potential improvements in the classification pipeline, provide a critical review of the performance of individual features and address the importance of constructing a large scale gold standard reference dataset.
△ Less
Submitted 13 July, 2017;
originally announced July 2017.
