CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12474v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 09:36:11 GMT
• Title: CSMeD: Bridging the Dataset Gap in Automated Citation Screening for Systematic Literature Reviews
• Authors: Wojciech Kusa, Oscar E. Mendoza, Matthias Samwald, Petr Knoth, Allan Hanbury
• Abstract summary: We introduce CSMeD, a meta-dataset consolidating nine publicly released collections. CSMeD serves as a comprehensive resource for training and evaluating the performance of automated citation screening models. We introduce CSMeD-FT, a new dataset designed explicitly for evaluating the full text publication screening task.
• Score: 10.207938863784829
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) play an essential role in summarising, synthesising and validating scientific evidence. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in using machine learning techniques to automate the identification of relevant studies for SLRs. However, the lack of standardised evaluation datasets makes comparing the performance of such automated literature screening systems difficult. In this paper, we analyse the citation screening evaluation datasets, revealing that many of the available datasets are either too small, suffer from data leakage or have limited applicability to systems treating automated literature screening as a classification task, as opposed to, for example, a retrieval or question-answering task. To address these challenges, we introduce CSMeD, a meta-dataset consolidating nine publicly released collections, providing unified access to 325 SLRs from the fields of medicine and computer science. CSMeD serves as a comprehensive resource for training and evaluating the performance of automated citation screening models. Additionally, we introduce CSMeD-FT, a new dataset designed explicitly for evaluating the full text publication screening task. To demonstrate the utility of CSMeD, we conduct experiments and establish baselines on new datasets.

Related papers

• Are Large Language Models Good Classifiers? A Study on Edit Intent Classification in Scientific Document Revisions [62.12545440385489]
  Large language models (LLMs) have brought substantial advancements in text generation, but their potential for enhancing classification tasks remains underexplored. We propose a framework for thoroughly investigating fine-tuning LLMs for classification, including both generation- and encoding-based approaches. We instantiate this framework in edit intent classification (EIC), a challenging and underexplored classification task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T20:48:28Z)
• The Frontier of Data Erasure: Machine Unlearning for Large Language Models [56.26002631481726]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are foundational to AI advancements. LLMs pose risks by potentially memorizing and disseminating sensitive, biased, or copyrighted information. Machine unlearning emerges as a cutting-edge solution to mitigate these concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-23T09:26:15Z)
• System for systematic literature review using multiple AI agents: Concept and an empirical evaluation [5.194208843843004]
  We introduce a novel multi-AI agent model designed to fully automate the process of conducting Systematic Literature Reviews. The model operates through a user-friendly interface where researchers input their topic. It generates a search string used to retrieve relevant academic papers. The model then autonomously summarizes the abstracts of these papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-13T10:27:52Z)
• Emerging Results on Automated Support for Searching and Selecting Evidence for Systematic Literature Review Updates [1.1153433121962064]
  We present emerging results on an automated approach to support searching and selecting studies for SLR updates in Software Engineering. We developed an automated tool prototype to perform the snowballing search technique and support selecting relevant studies for SLR updates using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T23:39:20Z)
• Clinfo.ai: An Open-Source Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Model System for Answering Medical Questions using Scientific Literature [44.715854387549605]
  We release Clinfo.ai, an open-source WebApp that answers clinical questions based on dynamically retrieved scientific literature. We report benchmark results for Clinfo.ai and other publicly available OpenQA systems on PubMedRS-200.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T19:43:39Z)
• Utilising a Large Language Model to Annotate Subject Metadata: A Case Study in an Australian National Research Data Catalogue [18.325675189960833]
  In support of open and reproducible research, there has been a rapidly increasing number of datasets made available for research. As the availability of datasets increases, it becomes more important to have quality metadata for discovering and reusing them. This paper proposes to leverage large language models (LLMs) for cost-effective annotation of subject metadata through the LLM-based in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T14:52:33Z)
• From Zero to Hero: Detecting Leaked Data through Synthetic Data Injection and Model Querying [10.919336198760808]
  We introduce a novel methodology to detect leaked data that are used to train classification models. textscLDSS involves injecting a small volume of synthetic data--characterized by local shifts in class distribution--into the owner's dataset. This enables the effective identification of models trained on leaked data through model querying alone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T10:36:28Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• Discover, Explanation, Improvement: An Automatic Slice Detection Framework for Natural Language Processing [72.14557106085284]
  slice detection models (SDM) automatically identify underperforming groups of datapoints. This paper proposes a benchmark named "Discover, Explain, improve (DEIM)" for classification NLP tasks. Our evaluation shows that Edisa can accurately select error-prone datapoints with informative semantic features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-08T19:00:00Z)
• Predicting Themes within Complex Unstructured Texts: A Case Study on Safeguarding Reports [66.39150945184683]
  We focus on the problem of automatically identifying the main themes in a safeguarding report using supervised classification approaches. Our results show the potential of deep learning models to simulate subject-expert behaviour even for complex tasks with limited labelled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-27T19:48:23Z)
• Scaling Systematic Literature Reviews with Machine Learning Pipelines [57.82662094602138]
  Systematic reviews entail the extraction of data from scientific documents. We construct a pipeline that automates each of these aspects, and experiment with many human-time vs. system quality trade-offs. We find that we can get surprising accuracy and generalisability of the whole pipeline system with only 2 weeks of human-expert annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-09T16:19:42Z)

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.