WikiM: Metapaths based Wikification of Scientific Abstracts

In order to disseminate the exponential extent of knowledge being produced in the form of scientific publications, it would be best to design mechanisms that connect it with already existing rich repository of concepts -- the Wikipedia. Not only does it make scientific reading simple and easy (by connecting the involved concepts used in the scientific articles to their Wikipedia explanations) but also improves the overall quality of the article. In this paper, we present a novel metapath based method, WikiM, to efficiently wikify scientific abstracts -- a topic that has been rarely investigated in the literature. One of the prime motivations for this work comes from the observation that, wikified abstracts of scientific documents help a reader to decide better, in comparison to the plain abstracts, whether (s)he would be interested to read the full article. We perform mention extraction mostly through traditional tf-idf measures coupled with a set of smart filters. The entity linking heavily leverages on the rich citation and author publication networks. Our observation is that various metapaths defined over these networks can significantly enhance the overall performance of the system. For mention extraction and entity linking, we outperform most of the competing state-of-the-art techniques by a large margin arriving at precision values of 72.42% and 73.8% respectively over a dataset from the ACL Anthology Network. In order to establish the robustness of our scheme, we wikify three other datasets and get precision values of 63.41%-94.03% and 67.67%-73.29% respectively for the mention extraction and the entity linking phase

Constructing Datasets for Multi-hop Reading Comprehension Across Documents

Most Reading Comprehension methods limit themselves to queries which can be answered using a single sentence, paragraph, or document. Enabling models to combine disjoint pieces of textual evidence would extend the scope of machine comprehension methods, but currently there exist no resources to train and test this capability. We propose a novel task to encourage the development of models for text understanding across multiple documents and to investigate the limits of existing methods. In our task, a model learns to seek and combine evidence - effectively performing multi-hop (alias multi-step) inference. We devise a methodology to produce datasets for this task, given a collection of query-answer pairs and thematically linked documents. Two datasets from different domains are induced, and we identify potential pitfalls and devise circumvention strategies. We evaluate two previously proposed competitive models and find that one can integrate information across documents. However, both models struggle to select relevant information, as providing documents guaranteed to be relevant greatly improves their performance. While the models outperform several strong baselines, their best accuracy reaches 42.9% compared to human performance at 74.0% - leaving ample room for improvement.Comment: This paper directly corresponds to the TACL version (https://transacl.org/ojs/index.php/tacl/article/view/1325) apart from minor changes in wording, additional footnotes, and appendice

Mining Domain-Specific Thesauri from Wikipedia: A case study

Domain-specific thesauri are high-cost, high-maintenance, high-value knowledge structures. We show how the classic thesaurus structure of terms and links can be mined automatically from Wikipedia. In a comparison with a professional thesaurus for agriculture we find that Wikipedia contains a substantial proportion of its concepts and semantic relations; furthermore it has impressive coverage of contemporary documents in the domain. Thesauri derived using our techniques capitalize on existing public efforts and tend to reflect contemporary language usage better than their costly, painstakingly-constructed manual counterparts

Comparing Knowledge Sources for Open-Domain Scientific Claim Verification

The increasing rate at which scientific knowledge is discovered and health claims shared online has highlighted the importance of developing efficient fact-checking systems for scientific claims. The usual setting for this task in the literature assumes that the documents containing the evidence for claims are already provided and annotated or contained in a limited corpus. This renders the systems unrealistic for real-world settings where knowledge sources with potentially millions of documents need to be queried to find relevant evidence. In this paper, we perform an array of experiments to test the performance of open-domain claim verification systems. We test the final verdict prediction of systems on four datasets of biomedical and health claims in different settings. While keeping the pipeline's evidence selection and verdict prediction parts constant, document retrieval is performed over three common knowledge sources (PubMed, Wikipedia, Google) and using two different information retrieval techniques. We show that PubMed works better with specialized biomedical claims, while Wikipedia is more suited for everyday health concerns. Likewise, BM25 excels in retrieval precision, while semantic search in recall of relevant evidence. We discuss the results, outline frequent retrieval patterns and challenges, and provide promising future directions.Comment: Accepted to EACL 202

Large-scale Hierarchical Alignment for Data-driven Text Rewriting

We propose a simple unsupervised method for extracting pseudo-parallel monolingual sentence pairs from comparable corpora representative of two different text styles, such as news articles and scientific papers. Our approach does not require a seed parallel corpus, but instead relies solely on hierarchical search over pre-trained embeddings of documents and sentences. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method through automatic and extrinsic evaluation on text simplification from the normal to the Simple Wikipedia. We show that pseudo-parallel sentences extracted with our method not only supplement existing parallel data, but can even lead to competitive performance on their own.Comment: RANLP 201

Eliciting New Wikipedia Users' Interests via Automatically Mined Questionnaires: For a Warm Welcome, Not a Cold Start

Every day, thousands of users sign up as new Wikipedia contributors. Once joined, these users have to decide which articles to contribute to, which users to seek out and learn from or collaborate with, etc. Any such task is a hard and potentially frustrating one given the sheer size of Wikipedia. Supporting newcomers in their first steps by recommending articles they would enjoy editing or editors they would enjoy collaborating with is thus a promising route toward converting them into long-term contributors. Standard recommender systems, however, rely on users' histories of previous interactions with the platform. As such, these systems cannot make high-quality recommendations to newcomers without any previous interactions -- the so-called cold-start problem. The present paper addresses the cold-start problem on Wikipedia by developing a method for automatically building short questionnaires that, when completed by a newly registered Wikipedia user, can be used for a variety of purposes, including article recommendations that can help new editors get started. Our questionnaires are constructed based on the text of Wikipedia articles as well as the history of contributions by the already onboarded Wikipedia editors. We assess the quality of our questionnaire-based recommendations in an offline evaluation using historical data, as well as an online evaluation with hundreds of real Wikipedia newcomers, concluding that our method provides cohesive, human-readable questions that perform well against several baselines. By addressing the cold-start problem, this work can help with the sustainable growth and maintenance of Wikipedia's diverse editor community.Comment: Accepted at the 13th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM-2019

Collaborative yet independent: Information practices in the physical sciences

In many ways, the physical sciences are at the forefront of using digital tools and methods to work with information and data. However, the fields and disciplines that make up the physical sciences are by no means uniform, and physical scientists find, use, and disseminate information in a variety of ways. This report examines information practices in the physical sciences across seven cases, and demonstrates the richly varied ways in which physical scientists work, collaborate, and share information and data. This report details seven case studies in the physical sciences. For each case, qualitative interviews and focus groups were used to understand the domain. Quantitative data gathered from a survey of participants highlights different information strategies employed across the cases, and identifies important software used for research. Finally, conclusions from across the cases are drawn, and recommendations are made. This report is the third in a series commissioned by the Research Information Network (RIN), each looking at information practices in a specific domain (life sciences, humanities, and physical sciences). The aim is to understand how researchers within a range of disciplines find and use information, and in particular how that has changed with the introduction of new technologies