Decade-long Utilization Patterns of ICSE Technical Papers and Associated Artifacts
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.05826v1
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:29:15 GMT
- Title: Decade-long Utilization Patterns of ICSE Technical Papers and Associated Artifacts
- Authors: Sharif Ahmed, Rey Ortiz, Nasir U. Eisty,
- Abstract summary: We collect data on usage attributes from papers and their artifacts, conduct a statistical assessment to identify differences, and analyze the top five papers in each attribute category.
There is a significant difference between paper citations and the usage of associated artifacts.
We provide a thorough overview of ICSE's accepted papers from the last decade, emphasizing the intricate relationship between research papers and their artifacts.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Context: Annually, ICSE acknowledges a range of papers, a subset of which are paired with research artifacts such as source code, datasets, and supplementary materials, adhering to the Open Science Policy. However, no prior systematic inquiry dives into gauging the influence of ICSE papers using artifact attributes. Objective: We explore the mutual impact between artifacts and their associated papers presented at ICSE over ten years. Method: We collect data on usage attributes from papers and their artifacts, conduct a statistical assessment to identify differences, and analyze the top five papers in each attribute category. Results: There is a significant difference between paper citations and the usage of associated artifacts. While statistical analyses show no notable difference between paper citations and GitHub stars, variations exist in views and/or downloads of papers and artifacts. Conclusion: We provide a thorough overview of ICSE's accepted papers from the last decade, emphasizing the intricate relationship between research papers and their artifacts. To enhance the assessment of artifact influence in software research, we recommend considering key attributes that may be present in one platform but not in another.
Related papers
- Research Artifacts in Software Engineering Publications: Status and Trends [13.765908874440278]
We collect 1,487 artifacts from 2,196 papers published in top-tier SE conferences from 2017 to 2022.
Based on our analysis, we reveal a rise in publications providing artifacts.
The usage of Zenodo for sharing artifacts has significantly increased.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-10T09:25:18Z) - Position: AI/ML Influencers Have a Place in the Academic Process [82.2069685579588]
We investigate the role of social media influencers in enhancing the visibility of machine learning research.
We have compiled a comprehensive dataset of over 8,000 papers, spanning tweets from December 2018 to October 2023.
Our statistical and causal inference analysis reveals a significant increase in citations for papers endorsed by these influencers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-24T20:05:49Z) - TRIAD: Automated Traceability Recovery based on Biterm-enhanced
Deduction of Transitive Links among Artifacts [53.92293118080274]
Traceability allows stakeholders to extract and comprehend the trace links among software artifacts introduced across the software life cycle.
Most rely on textual similarities among software artifacts, such as those based on Information Retrieval (IR)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-28T06:44:24Z) - 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) - Chain-of-Factors Paper-Reviewer Matching [32.86512592730291]
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.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-23T01:29:18Z) - Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A
review [10.203602318836444]
This literature review identifies indicators that associate with higher impact or higher quality research from article text.
It includes studies that used machine learning techniques to predict citation counts or quality scores for journal articles or conference papers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-11T06:58:39Z) - Citation Trajectory Prediction via Publication Influence Representation
Using Temporal Knowledge Graph [52.07771598974385]
Existing approaches mainly rely on mining temporal and graph data from academic articles.
Our framework is composed of three modules: difference-preserved graph embedding, fine-grained influence representation, and learning-based trajectory calculation.
Experiments are conducted on both the APS academic dataset and our contributed AIPatent dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-02T07:43:26Z) - EBOCA: Evidences for BiOmedical Concepts Association Ontology [55.41644538483948]
This paper proposes EBOCA, an ontology that describes (i) biomedical domain concepts and associations between them, and (ii) evidences supporting these associations.
Test data coming from a subset of DISNET and automatic association extractions from texts has been transformed to create a Knowledge Graph that can be used in real scenarios.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-08-01T18:47:03Z) - CitationIE: Leveraging the Citation Graph for Scientific Information
Extraction [89.33938657493765]
We use the citation graph of referential links between citing and cited papers.
We observe a sizable improvement in end-to-end information extraction over the state-of-the-art.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-03T03:00:12Z) - Examining Citations of Natural Language Processing Literature [31.87319293259599]
We show that only about 56% of the papers in AA are cited ten or more times.
CL Journal has the most cited papers, but its citation dominance has lessened in recent years.
papers on sentiment classification, anaphora resolution, and entity recognition have the highest median citations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-02T20:01:59Z)
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.