Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review

December 11, 2022 ยท The Cartographer ยท ๐Ÿ› arXiv.org

๐Ÿ“š THE CARTOGRAPHER: The Cartographer
Survey/review paper โ€” maps the landscape rather than implementing a method.

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
"Title-pattern auto-detect: Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall arXiv ID 2212.06574 Category cs.DL: Digital Libraries Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 6 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 10 days ago
Abstract
This literature review identifies indicators that associate with higher impact or higher quality research from article text (e.g., titles, abstracts, lengths, cited references and readability) or metadata (e.g., the number of authors, international or domestic collaborations, journal impact factors and authors' h-index). This includes studies that used machine learning techniques to predict citation counts or quality scores for journal articles or conference papers. The literature review also includes evidence about the strength of association between bibliometric indicators and quality score rankings from previous UK Research Assessment Exercises (RAEs) and REFs in different subjects and years and similar evidence from other countries (e.g., Australia and Italy). In support of this, the document also surveys studies that used public datasets of citations, social media indictors or open review texts (e.g., Dimensions, OpenCitations, Altmetric.com and Publons) to help predict the scholarly impact of articles. The results of this part of the literature review were used to inform the experiments using machine learning to predict REF journal article quality scores, as reported in the AI experiments report for this project. The literature review also covers technology to automate editorial processes, to provide quality control for papers and reviewers' suggestions, to match reviewers with articles, and to automatically categorise journal articles into fields. Bias and transparency in technology assisted assessment are also discussed.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Digital Libraries