Do peers see more in a paper than its authors?

Recent years have shown a gradual shift in the content of biomedical publications that is freely accessible, from titles and abstracts to full text. This has enabled new forms of automatic text analysis and has given rise to some interesting questions: How informative is the abstract compared to the full-text? What important information in the full-text is not present in the abstract? What should a good summary contain that is not already in the abstract? Do authors and peers see an article differently? We answer these questions by comparing the information content of the abstract to that in citances-sentences containing citations to that article. We contrast the important points of an article as judged by its authors versus as seen by peers. Focusing on the area of molecular interactions, we perform manual and automatic analysis, and we find that the set of all citances to a target article not only covers most information (entities, functions, experimental methods, and other biological concepts) found in its abstract, but also contains 20% more concepts. We further present a detailed summary of the differences across information types, and we examine the effects other citations and time have on the content of citances

Where are your Manners? Sharing Best Community Practices in the Web 2.0

The Web 2.0 fosters the creation of communities by offering users a wide array of social software tools. While the success of these tools is based on their ability to support different interaction patterns among users by imposing as few limitations as possible, the communities they support are not free of rules (just think about the posting rules in a community forum or the editing rules in a thematic wiki). In this paper we propose a framework for the sharing of best community practices in the form of a (potentially rule-based) annotation layer that can be integrated with existing Web 2.0 community tools (with specific focus on wikis). This solution is characterized by minimal intrusiveness and plays nicely within the open spirit of the Web 2.0 by providing users with behavioral hints rather than by enforcing the strict adherence to a set of rules.Comment: ACM symposium on Applied Computing, Honolulu : \'Etats-Unis d'Am\'erique (2009

Collaborative Development and Evaluation of Text-processing Workflows in a UIMA-supported Web-based Workbench

Challenges in creating comprehensive text-processing worklows include a lack of the interoperability of individual components coming from different providers and/or a requirement imposed on the end users to know programming techniques to compose such workflows. In this paper we demonstrate Argo, a web-based system that addresses these issues in several ways. It supports the widely adopted Unstructured Information Management Architecture (UIMA), which handles the problem of interoperability; it provides a web browser-based interface for developing workflows by drawing diagrams composed of a selection of available processing components; and it provides novel user-interactive analytics such as the annotation editor which constitutes a bridge between automatic processing and manual correction. These features extend the target audience of Argo to users with a limited or no technical background. Here, we focus specifically on the construction of advanced workflows, involving multiple branching and merging points, to facilitate various comparative evalutions. Together with the use of user-collaboration capabilities supported in Argo, we demonstrate several use cases including visual inspections, comparisions of multiple processing segments or complete solutions against a reference standard, inter-annotator agreement, and shared task mass evaluations. Ultimetely, Argo emerges as a one-stop workbench for defining, processing, editing and evaluating text processing tasks

ELAN development, keeping pace with communities' needs

ELAN is a versatile multimedia annotation tool that is being developed at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. About a decade ago it emerged out of a number of corpus tools and utilities and it has been extended ever since. This paper focuses on the efforts made to ensure that the application keeps up with the growing needs of that era in linguistics and multimodality research; growing needs in terms of length and resolution of recordings, the number of recordings made and transcribed and the number of levels of annotation per transcription