Cited by 10Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorTopic ModelingNatural Language Processing Techniques

Bridging the gap: A survey of document retrieval techniques for high-resource and low-resource languages

Open access
Kazi, Samreen, Khoja, Shakeel, Daud, Ali·2025·Computer Science Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cosrev.2025.100756

Cites

212 of 212 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 220 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kazi, S., Khoja, S., & Daud, A.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Business Administration Karachi (PK)
  • Rabdan Academy (AE)
Corresponding author
Daud, Ali
Venue
Computer Science Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-08
Volume
57
Pages
100756
ISSN
1574-0137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4409482736
Cited by
9
References
220
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3
FWCI
9.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computer Science Review (publishedVersion)
  • Rabdan Academy Digital Repository (Rabdan Academy) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
document retrieval, low-resource languages, high-resource languages, cross-lingual information retrieval, domain adaptation, hybrid retrieval, neural ranking, morphological complexity, orthographic variation, data scarcity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review