The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Summarizing Scientific Articles: Experiments with Relevance and Rhetorical Status
Open accessAbstract
In this article we propose a strategy for the summarization of scientific articles that concentrates on the rhetorical status of statements in an article: Material for summaries is selected in such a way that summaries can highlight the new contribution of the source article and situate it with respect to earlier work. We provide a gold standard for summaries of this kind consisting of a substantial corpus of conference articles in computational linguistics annotated with human judgments of the rhetorical status and relevance of each sentence in the articles. We present several experiments measuring our judges' agreement on these annotations. We also present an algorithm that, on the basis of the annotated training material, selects content from unseen articles and classifies it into a fixed set of seven rhetorical categories. The output of this extraction and classification system can be viewed as a single-document summary in its own right; alternatively, it provides starting material for the generation of task-oriented and user-tailored summaries designed to give users an overview of a scientific field.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles
Teufel, S., Carletta, J., & Moens, M. (1999) · Proceedings of the ninth conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics - · doi:10.3115/977035.977051 · Cited by 186
Self-citation
Cited by
Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics
Artstein, R., & Poesio, M. (2008) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli.07-034-r2 · Cited by 1,665
Automatic classification of citation function
Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., & Tidhar, D. (2006) · Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '06 · doi:10.3115/1610075.1610091 · Cited by 437
Self-citationAutomatic summarising: The state of the art
Spärck Jones, K. (2007) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2007.03.009 · Cited by 353
Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators
(2019) · Springer Handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3 · Cited by 300
Information retrieval and text mining technologies for chemistry
Krallinger, M., Rabal, O., Lourenço, A., Oyarzabal, J., & Valencia, A. (2017) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00851 · Cited by 281
Metadata
- Authors
- Teufel, S., & Moens, M.
- Venue
- Computational Linguistics
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 409-445
- ISSN
- 0891-2017 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9312
- OpenAlex
- W2442495973
- Cited by
- 638
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 18.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Summarizing Scientific Articles: Experiments with Relevance and Rhetorical Status. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/089120102762671936
- The paper
- Teufel, S., & Moens, M. (2002). Summarizing Scientific Articles: Experiments with Relevance and Rhetorical Status. Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1162/089120102762671936
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.