IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i11d10.1007_s11192-024-05157-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intelligent recognition of high-quality academic papers: based on knowledge-based metasemantic networks

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaobo Tang

    (Wuhan University
    Wuhan University)

  • Xin Du

    (Wuhan University)

  • Qiongfu Wang

    (Nuclear Power Institution of China)

  • Jialin Wu

    (Wuhan University)

Abstract

With the development of science and technology, academic papers rapidly accumulate as an essential form of research results. How to quickly discover high-quality papers among the vast amount of academic papers from fine-grained text content is of great significance in exploring the establishment of a scientific evaluation system. This paper constructs an intelligent recognition model for high-quality academic papers based on knowledge-based metasemantic networks. The knowledge elements in the ACM citation network dataset were extracted, and each knowledge element's text vector representation was obtained using SciBERT. Seven types of academic paper knowledge metasemantic networks were constructed through cosine similarity and similarity threshold. Considering the impact factor of journals and the weighted average citation metrics of papers, the metrics are used to label academic papers as high and low quality and to construct a dataset for the intelligent identification of high-quality academic papers. Mining degree centrality, mediator centrality, proximity centrality, eigenvector centrality, and clustering coefficients of knowledge elements from the perspective of knowledge metasemantic networks. Finally, the intelligent recognition model of high-quality academic papers is constructed. The experimental results show that the richer the variety of knowledge elements contained in the paper, the higher the quality of the paper. When a paper has four types of knowledge elements, the probability that the paper belongs to the high-quality category increases by 4.3% over the baseline. The research problem and solution knowledge elements contribute highly to the quality of academic papers, with the highly centered research problem knowledge element being essential. The intelligent recognition model for high-quality academic papers based on DNN has the best results, with P-value, R-value, and F1-value reaching 0.738, 0.659, and 0.696, respectively. The experimental results show that the intelligent recognition method of high-quality academic papers based on knowledge-based metasemantic networks proposed in this paper is effective.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaobo Tang & Xin Du & Qiongfu Wang & Jialin Wu, 2024. "Intelligent recognition of high-quality academic papers: based on knowledge-based metasemantic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(11), pages 6779-6812, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05157-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05157-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05157-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-05157-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dietmar Wolfram & Peiling Wang & Adam Hembree & Hyoungjoo Park, 2020. "Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1033-1051, November.
    2. D. R. Amancio & M. G. V. Nunes & O. N. Oliveira & L. F. Costa, 2012. "Using complex networks concepts to assess approaches for citations in scientific papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 827-842, June.
    3. Giatsidis, Christos & Nikolentzos, Giannis & Zhang, Chenhui & Tang, Jie & Vazirgiannis, Michalis, 2019. "Rooted citation graphs density metrics for research papers influence evaluation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 757-768.
    4. Alexander J. Gates & Qing Ke & Onur Varol & Albert-László Barabási, 2019. "Nature’s reach: narrow work has broad impact," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7781), pages 32-34, November.
    5. Liu Yang & Keping Li & Dan Zhao & Shuang Gu & Dongyang Yan, 2019. "A Network Method for Identifying the Root Cause of High-Speed Rail Faults Based on Text Data," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Feiheng Luo & Aixin Sun & Mojisola Erdt & Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar & Yin-Leng Theng, 2018. "Exploring prestigious citations sourced from top universities in bibliometrics and altmetrics: a case study in the computer science discipline," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Haner, Udo-Ernst, 2002. "Innovation quality--a conceptual framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 31-37, November.
    8. Elise S. Brezis & Aliaksandr Birukou, 2020. "Arbitrariness in the peer review process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 393-411, April.
    9. Zhichao Fang & Rodrigo Costas, 2020. "Studying the accumulation velocity of altmetric data tracked by Altmetric.com," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 1077-1101, May.
    10. Samuel Zanferdini Oliva & Livia Oliveira-Ciabati & Denise Gazotto Dezembro & Mário Sérgio Adolfi Júnior & Maísa Carvalho Silva & Hugo Cesar Pessotti & Juliana Tarossi Pollettini, 2021. "Text structuring methods based on complex network: a systematic review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1471-1493, February.
    11. Chao Min & Ying Ding & Jiang Li & Yi Bu & Lei Pei & Jianjun Sun, 2018. "Innovation or imitation: The diffusion of citations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(10), pages 1271-1282, October.
    12. Jane Cho, 2021. "Altmetrics analysis of highly cited academic papers in the field of library and information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7623-7635, September.
    13. Bornmann, Lutz, 2014. "Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 895-903.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Houqiang Yu & Biegzat Murat & Longfei Li & Tingting Xiao, 2021. "How accurate are Twitter and Facebook altmetrics data? A comparative content analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4437-4463, May.
    2. Cheng, Xi & Wang, Haoran & Tang, Li & Jiang, Weiyan & Zhou, Maotian & Wang, Guoyan, 2024. "Open peer review correlates with altmetrics but not with citations: Evidence from Nature Communications and PLoS One," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).
    3. Guoqiang Liang & Haiyan Hou & Qiao Chen & Zhigang Hu, 2020. "Diffusion and adoption: an explanatory model of “question mark” and “rising star” articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 219-232, July.
    4. Hou, Jianhua & Wang, Dongyi & Li, Jing, 2022. "A new method for measuring the originality of academic articles based on knowledge units in semantic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    5. Zhichao Fang & Rodrigo Costas & Wencan Tian & Xianwen Wang & Paul Wouters, 2020. "An extensive analysis of the presence of altmetric data for Web of Science publications across subject fields and research topics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2519-2549, September.
    6. Jane Cho, 2021. "Altmetrics analysis of highly cited academic papers in the field of library and information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7623-7635, September.
    7. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    8. González-Betancor, Sara M. & Dorta-González, Pablo, 2023. "Does society show differential attention to researchers based on gender and field?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    9. Samuel Zanferdini Oliva & Livia Oliveira-Ciabati & Denise Gazotto Dezembro & Mário Sérgio Adolfi Júnior & Maísa Carvalho Silva & Hugo Cesar Pessotti & Juliana Tarossi Pollettini, 2021. "Text structuring methods based on complex network: a systematic review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1471-1493, February.
    10. Sergio Copiello, 2020. "Other than detecting impact in advance, alternative metrics could act as early warning signs of retractions: tentative findings of a study into the papers retracted by PLoS ONE," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2449-2469, December.
    11. Lin Zhang & Zhenyu Gou & Zhichao Fang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Ying Huang, 2023. "Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(13), pages 1485-1497, December.
    12. Yang, Siluo & Zheng, Mengxue & Yu, Yonghao & Wolfram, Dietmar, 2021. "Are Altmetric.com scores effective for research impact evaluation in the social sciences and humanities?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    13. Yashan Li & Jinge Mao & Lin Zhang & Dongbo Wang & Si Shen & Ying Huang, 2022. "How scientific research incorporates policy: an examination using the case of China’s science and technology evaluation system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5283-5306, September.
    14. Dimity Stephen & Stephan Stahlschmidt, 2024. "Contrasting cross-correlation: Meta-analyses of the associations between citations and 13 altmetrics, incorporating moderating variables," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6049-6063, October.
    15. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    16. Duan, Yunlong & Liu, Shuling & Cheng, Hao & Chin, Tachia & Luo, Xuan, 2021. "The moderating effect of absorptive capacity on transnational knowledge spillover and the innovation quality of high-tech industries in host countries: Evidence from the Chinese manufacturing industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    17. Luciana Aparecida Barbieri da Rosa & Clandia Maffini Gomes & Waleska Campos & Carolina Rodrigues & Tais Pentiado Godoy & Jordana Marques Kneipp, 2022. "Influencing Factors of The Innovation Power in the Adoption of Sustainability Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-15, October.
    18. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    19. Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang & Yang Zhang, 2023. "The effect of social media knowledge cascade: an analysis of scientific papers diffusion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5169-5195, September.
    20. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2020. "Altmetrics of the Open Access Institutional Repositories: a webometrics approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1181-1192, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05157-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.