paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

Quantifying and suppressing ranking bias in a large citation network

2017-03-23 · Vaccario Giacomo, Medo Matus, Wider Nicolas, Mariani Manuel Sebastian

It is widely recognized that citation counts for papers from different fields cannot be directly compared because different scientific fields adopt different citation practices. Citation counts are also strongly biased by paper age since older papers had more time to attract citations. Various procedures aim at suppressing these biases and give rise to new normalized indicators, such as the relative citation count. We use a large citation dataset from Microsoft Academic Graph and a new statistical framework based on the Mahalanobis distance to show that the rankings by well known indicators, including the relative citation count and Google's PageRank score, are significantly biased by paper field and age. We propose a general normalization procedure motivated by the $z$-score which produces much less biased rankings when applied to citation count and PageRank score.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:1703.08071

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Unbiased evaluation of ranking metrics reveals consistent performance in science and technology citation data

2020-01-15 · Shuqi Xu, Manuel Sebastian Mariani, Linyuan Lü, Matúš Medo

Despite the increasing use of citation-based metrics for research evaluation purposes, we do not know yet which metrics best deliver on their promise to gauge the significance of a scientific paper or a patent. We assess…

Information RetrievalRetrieval

S-index: Towards Better Metrics for Quantifying Research Impact

2015-07-13 · Shah Neil, Song Yang

The ongoing growth in the volume of scientific literature available today precludes researchers from efficiently discerning the relevant from irrelevant content. Researchers are constantly interested in impactful papers,…

The Role of Positive and Negative Citations in Scientific Evaluation

2020-08-10 · Xiaomei Bai, Ivan Lee, Zhaolong Ning, Amr Tolba 외

Quantifying the impact of scientific papers objectively is crucial for research output assessment, which subsequently affects institution and country rankings, research funding allocations, academic recruitment and natio…

Benchmarking Adversarial Robustness to Bias Elicitation in Large Language Models: Scalable Automated Assessment with LLM-as-a-Judge

2025-04-10 · Riccardo Cantini, Alessio Orsino, Massimo Ruggiero, Domenico Talia

Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized artificial intelligence, driving advancements in machine translation, summarization, and conversational agents. However, their increasing integration into critical societa…

Adversarial RobustnessBenchmarkingFairnessMachine Translation

Public Profile Matters: A Scalable Integrated Approach to Recommend Citations in the Wild

2026-03-18 · Karan Goyal, Dikshant Kukreja, Vikram Goyal, Mukesh Mohania arxiv

Proper citation of relevant literature is essential for contextualising and validating scientific contributions. While current citation recommendation systems leverage local and global textual information, they often ove…

Recommendation Systems