Chain-of-Factors Paper-Reviewer Matching

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14483v2
• Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 07:42:30 GMT
• Title: Chain-of-Factors Paper-Reviewer Matching
• Authors: Yu Zhang, Yanzhen Shen, SeongKu Kang, Xiusi Chen, Bowen Jin, Jiawei Han,
• Abstract summary: We propose a unified model for paper-reviewer matching that jointly considers semantic, topic, and citation factors. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed Chain-of-Factors model in comparison with state-of-the-art paper-reviewer matching methods and scientific pre-trained language models.
• Score: 32.86512592730291
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: With the rapid increase in paper submissions to academic conferences, the need for automated and accurate paper-reviewer matching is more critical than ever. Previous efforts in this area have considered various factors to assess the relevance of a reviewer's expertise to a paper, such as the semantic similarity, shared topics, and citation connections between the paper and the reviewer's previous works. However, most of these studies focus on only one factor, resulting in an incomplete evaluation of the paper-reviewer relevance. To address this issue, we propose a unified model for paper-reviewer matching that jointly considers semantic, topic, and citation factors. To be specific, during training, we instruction-tune a contextualized language model shared across all factors to capture their commonalities and characteristics; during inference, we chain the three factors to enable step-by-step, coarse-to-fine search for qualified reviewers given a submission. Experiments on four datasets (one of which is newly contributed by us) spanning various fields such as machine learning, computer vision, information retrieval, and data mining consistently demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed Chain-of-Factors model in comparison with state-of-the-art paper-reviewer matching methods and scientific pre-trained language models.

Related papers

• RelevAI-Reviewer: A Benchmark on AI Reviewers for Survey Paper Relevance [0.8089605035945486]
  We propose RelevAI-Reviewer, an automatic system that conceptualizes the task of survey paper review as a classification problem. We introduce a novel dataset comprised of 25,164 instances. Each instance contains one prompt and four candidate papers, each varying in relevance to the prompt. We develop a machine learning (ML) model capable of determining the relevance of each paper and identifying the most pertinent one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T06:42:32Z)
• Explaining Relationships Among Research Papers [14.223038413516685]
  We propose a feature-based, LLM-prompting approach to generate richer citation texts. We find a strong correlation between human preference and integrative writing style, suggesting that humans prefer high-level, abstract citations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T23:38:39Z)
• CausalCite: A Causal Formulation of Paper Citations [80.82622421055734]
  CausalCite is a new way to measure the significance of a paper by assessing the causal impact of the paper on its follow-up papers. It is based on a novel causal inference method, TextMatch, which adapts the traditional matching framework to high-dimensional text embeddings. We demonstrate the effectiveness of CausalCite on various criteria, such as high correlation with paper impact as reported by scientific experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-05T23:09:39Z)
• Topics in the Haystack: Extracting and Evaluating Topics beyond Coherence [0.0]
  We propose a method that incorporates a deeper understanding of both sentence and document themes. This allows our model to detect latent topics that may include uncommon words or neologisms. We present correlation coefficients with human identification of intruder words and achieve near-human level results at the word-intrusion task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-30T12:24:25Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Revise and Resubmit: An Intertextual Model of Text-based Collaboration in Peer Review [52.359007622096684]
  Peer review is a key component of the publishing process in most fields of science. Existing NLP studies focus on the analysis of individual texts. editorial assistance often requires modeling interactions between pairs of texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-22T16:39:38Z)
• Author Clustering and Topic Estimation for Short Texts [69.54017251622211]
  We propose a novel model that expands on the Latent Dirichlet Allocation by modeling strong dependence among the words in the same document. We also simultaneously cluster users, removing the need for post-hoc cluster estimation. Our method performs as well as -- or better -- than traditional approaches to problems arising in short text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T20:55:55Z)
• What's New? Summarizing Contributions in Scientific Literature [85.95906677964815]
  We introduce a new task of disentangled paper summarization, which seeks to generate separate summaries for the paper contributions and the context of the work. We extend the S2ORC corpus of academic articles by adding disentangled "contribution" and "context" reference labels. We propose a comprehensive automatic evaluation protocol which reports the relevance, novelty, and disentanglement of generated outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-06T02:23:01Z)
• A Survey on Text Classification: From Shallow to Deep Learning [83.47804123133719]
  The last decade has seen a surge of research in this area due to the unprecedented success of deep learning. This paper fills the gap by reviewing the state-of-the-art approaches from 1961 to 2021. We create a taxonomy for text classification according to the text involved and the models used for feature extraction and classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-02T00:09:03Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.