1,720,976 research outputs found
Significant Revision Identification between Revised Texts in a Multi-Author Environment
Full text link© 2019 Ping Ping TanDespite advancement in collaborative writing tools, the track changes capability remains limited to highlighting syntactic changes, with authors still required to manually read through each of the revisions. We envision a collaborative authoring system where an author could accept all minor edits first and then focus on the substantial changes. The primary goal of this thesis is to develop a computational framework for significant revision identification where paraphrase approaches cannot fully support such identification. An existing taxonomy of revision analysis categorises revisions to surface (i.e. no meaning) and text-base (i.e. meaning) changes, with further categorisation of surface change to formal changes and meaning preserving changes, while textbase change is sub-divided to micro-structure and macro-structure changes. However, the taxonomy lacks details for computational modelling. Through examination of the works in the domain of psycho-linguistics, introspective analysis and feedback from both authors and non-authors on what constitute significant revisions, a conceptual framework for significant revision identification is proposed. An inter-rater agreement of alpha Krippendorff = 0.745 was obtained for the annotation between the authors and non-authors. The core concept of our proposed approach is bi-directional textual entailment assessment. We demonstrated that this concept is computationally feasible by relying on existing textual entailment systems. Our proposed approach is more accurate (micro-averaged F1 = 0.541) compared to several baseline approaches based on edit distance, which are similar to the current track changes capability built in most of the word processors. Computationally identifying significant revisions between two versions of a text document has the potential to improve the revision process in a multi-author environment when multiple revisions are done by different authors
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Characterizing Text Revisions to Better Support Collaborative
Full text linkDespite advancement in collaborative writing tools,
the track changes capability in modern editors remains limited
to highlighting syntactic changes, with authors still required to
manually read through each of the revisions. We envision a
collaborative authoring system where an author could accept all
minor edits first and then focus on the substantial changes. To
support this, we define the task of significant revision
identification as the task of identifying the revisions between two
versions of a text according to one of four categories, i.e. formal,
meaning preserving, micro- and macro-structure. Micro-
structure change corresponds to minor meaning change while
macro-structure change corresponds to major meaning change.
Our main contribution is to define a computational approach to
this task, by framing the task as bi-directional entailment
between the original and revised sentences. An existing
recognition of textual entailment (RTE) system is applied to
evaluate whether the revised texts entails. We evaluate the
approach through a novel corpus consisting of multiple versions
of drafts of academic papers written by multiple authors, which
were annotated with the four revision types by both authors and
non-authors of the papers. The proposed bi-directional textual
entailment approach performs better than baseline edit distance
approaches, which is similar to the current track changes
capability built into most word processors
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
