GotFunding: A grant recommendation system based on scientific articles

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.12840v1
• Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 14:45:34 GMT
• Title: GotFunding: A grant recommendation system based on scientific articles
• Abstract summary: We present textscGotFunding (Grant recOmmendaTion based on past FUNDING), a recommendation system trained on NIH grant--publication records. Our results show that the ranking considers most important 1) the year difference between publication and grant grant, 2) the amount of information provided in the publication, and 3) the relevance of the publication to the grant.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Obtaining funding is an important part of becoming a successful scientist. Junior faculty spend a great deal of time finding the right agencies and programs that best match their research profile. But what are the factors that influence the best publication--grant matching? Some universities might employ pre-award personnel to understand these factors, but not all institutions can afford to hire them. Historical records of publications funded by grants can help us understand the matching process and also help us develop recommendation systems to automate it. In this work, we present \textsc{GotFunding} (Grant recOmmendaTion based on past FUNDING), a recommendation system trained on National Institutes of Health's (NIH) grant--publication records. Our system achieves a high performance (NDCG@1 = 0.945) by casting the problem as learning to rank. By analyzing the features that make predictions effective, our results show that the ranking considers most important 1) the year difference between publication and grant grant, 2) the amount of information provided in the publication, and 3) the relevance of the publication to the grant. We discuss future improvements of the system and an online tool for scientists to try.

Related papers

• APRES: An Agentic Paper Revision and Evaluation System [44.44345338738518]
  The primary way scientists communicate their work and receive feedback from the community is through peer review.<n>In this paper, we introduce a novel method APRES powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) to update a scientific papers text based on an evaluation rubric.<n>Our automated method discovers a rubric that is highly predictive of future citation counts, and integrate it with APRES in an automated system that revises papers to enhance their quality and impact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T16:29:13Z)
• The Role of Computing Resources in Publishing Foundation Model Research [84.20094600030092]
  We evaluate the relationship between these resources and the scientific advancement of foundation models (FM)<n>We reviewed 6517 FM papers published between 2022 to 2024, and surveyed 229 first-authors to the impact of computing resources on scientific output.<n>We find that increased computing is correlated with national funding allocations and citations, but our findings don't observe the strong correlations with research environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T14:50:45Z)
• How to Find Fantastic Papers: Self-Rankings as a Powerful Predictor of Scientific Impact Beyond Peer Review [41.30621399289495]
  We investigate an underexplored measure for identifying high-impact research: authors' own rankings of their multiple submissions to the same AI conference.<n>We conducted a large-scale experiment at a leading AI conference, where 1,342 researchers self-ranked their 2,592 submissions by perceived quality.<n>We found that papers ranked highest by their authors received twice as many citations as their lowest-ranked counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-02T15:50:21Z)
• Rs4rs: Semantically Find Recent Publications from Top Recommendation System-Related Venues [0.2812395851874055]
  Rs4rs is a web application designed to perform semantic search on recent papers from top conferences and journals related to Recommender Systems. Rs4rs addresses these issues by providing a user-friendly platform where researchers can input their topic of interest and receive a list of recent, relevant papers from top Recommender Systems venues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T12:53:06Z)
• Predicting Award Winning Research Papers at Publication Time [5.318302558039615]
  We predict the likelihood for a research paper of winning an award only relying on information available at publication time. We made our experiments considering the ArnetMiner citation graph, while the ground truth on award-winning papers has been obtained from a collection of best paper awards from 32 computer science conferences. Remarkably, The high recall and the low false negatives rate, show how the model performs very well at identifying papers that will not win an award.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T12:09:10Z)
• What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
  In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
• Promoting Research Collaboration with Open Data Driven Team Recommendation in Response to Call for Proposals [10.732914229005903]
  We describe a novel system to recommend teams using a variety of AI methods. We create teams to maximize goodness along a metric balancing short- and long-term objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-18T00:04:08Z)
• The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform [79.4493235243312]
  Semantic Scholar (S2) is an open data platform and website aimed at accelerating science by helping scholars discover and understand scientific literature. We combine public and proprietary data sources using state-of-the-art techniques for scholarly PDF content extraction and automatic knowledge graph construction. The graph includes advanced semantic features such as structurally parsed text, natural language summaries, and vector embeddings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-24T17:13:08Z)
• Fairness in Recommender Systems: Research Landscape and Future Directions [119.67643184567623]
  We review the concepts and notions of fairness that were put forward in the area in the recent past. We present an overview of how research in this field is currently operationalized. Overall, our analysis of recent works points to certain research gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T08:34:25Z)
• FPSRS: A Fusion Approach for Paper Submission Recommendation System [0.0]
  This paper presents two newer approaches for recommending scientific articles. The first approach employs RNN structures besides using Conv1D. We also introduce a new method, namely DistilBertAims, using DistillBert for two cases of uppercase and lower-case words to vectorize features such as Title, Abstract, and Keywords. The experimental results show that the second approach could obtain a better performance, which is 62.46% and 12.44% higher than the best of the previous study.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-12T09:06:56Z)
• Algorithmic Fairness Datasets: the Story so Far [68.45921483094705]
  Data-driven algorithms are studied in diverse domains to support critical decisions, directly impacting people's well-being. A growing community of researchers has been investigating the equity of existing algorithms and proposing novel ones, advancing the understanding of risks and opportunities of automated decision-making for historically disadvantaged populations. Progress in fair Machine Learning hinges on data, which can be appropriately used only if adequately documented. Unfortunately, the algorithmic fairness community suffers from a collective data documentation debt caused by a lack of information on specific resources (opacity) and scatteredness of available information (sparsity)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-03T17:25:46Z)
• Ranking Scientific Papers Using Preference Learning [48.78161994501516]
  We cast it as a paper ranking problem based on peer review texts and reviewer scores. We introduce a novel, multi-faceted generic evaluation framework for making final decisions based on peer reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-02T19:41:47Z)
• 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)
• A Measure of Research Taste [91.3755431537592]
  We present a citation-based measure that rewards both productivity and taste. The presented measure, CAP, balances the impact of publications and their quantity. We analyze the characteristics of CAP for highly-cited researchers in biology, computer science, economics, and physics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-17T18:01:47Z)

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.