Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
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.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 58 of its 358 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Dec 2022.
Builds on
58 of 358 references.
References · 58
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2018Assessing Gender Bias in Machine Translation -- A Case Study with Google Translatecited by 121
- 2020Explainable Artificial Intelligence: a Systematic Reviewcited by 79
- 2021Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing?cited by 63
- 2020Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis of Scientific Reviewscited by 24
- 2020An Open Review of OpenReview: A Critical Analysis of the Machine Learning Conference Review Processcited by 23
- 2018Predicting citation counts based on deep neural network learning techniquescited by 21
- 2021Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journalscited by 17
- 2019OpenCitations, an infrastructure organization for open scholarshipcited by 16
- 2015The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a Comparative Analysiscited by 14
- 2016Viziometrics: Analyzing Visual Information in the Scientific Literaturecited by 14
- 2020Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations' COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citationscited by 11
38 more
- 2020Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academiccited by 11
- 2021Structured Citation Trend Prediction Using Graph Neural Networkscited by 11
- 2020Large Scale Subject Category Classification of Scholarly Papers with Deep Attentive Neural Networkscited by 9
- 2020The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysiscited by 9
- 2014Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900cited by 8
- 2018International Research Collaboration: Novelty, Conventionality, and Atypicality in Knowledge Recombinationcited by 8
- 2014Do altmetrics correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspectivecited by 7
- 2018Could scientists use Altmetric.com scores to predict longer term citation counts?cited by 6
- 2019Analyzing Linguistic Complexity and Scientific Impactcited by 6
- 2020Early Indicators of Scientific Impact: Predicting Citations with Altmetricscited by 6
- 2015Which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge?cited by 4
- 2016Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literaturecited by 4
- 2017Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewercited by 4
- 2016Impact of lexical and sentiment factors on the popularity of scientific paperscited by 3
- 2016Three practical field normalised alternative indicator formulae for research evaluationcited by 3
- 2018Dimensions: A Competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?cited by 3
- 2018Do altmetrics assess societal impact in a comparable way to case studies? An empirical test of the convergent validity of altmetrics based on data from the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF)cited by 3
- 2014The Operationalization of "Fields" as WoS Subject Categories (WCs) in Evaluative Bibliometrics: The cases of "Library and Information Science" and "Science & Technology Studies"cited by 2
- 2015The Effects of Research Level and Article Type on the Differences between Citation Metrics and F1000 Recommendationscited by 2
- 2015Large-Scale Analysis of the Accuracy of the Journal Classification Systems of Web of Science and Scopuscited by 2
- 2017Research Portfolio Analysis and Topic Prominencecited by 2
- 2017The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impactcited by 2
- 2018The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italycited by 2
- 2019Granularity of algorithmically constructed publication-level classifications of research publications: Identification of specialtiescited by 2
- 2019COCI, the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citationscited by 2
- 2021Is research with qualitative data more prevalent and impactful now? Interviews, case studies, focus groups and ethnographiescited by 2
- 2021GraphConfRec: A Graph Neural Network-Based Conference Recommender Systemcited by 2
- 2013Comparison of a citation-based indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of research-group excellencecited by 1
- 2013The normalization of citation counts based on classification systemscited by 1
- 2013The Google Scholar Experiment: how to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicatorscited by 1
- 2014Inter-rater reliability and convergent validity of F1000Prime peer reviewcited by 1
- 2014About the size of Google Scholar: playing the numberscited by 1
- 2014Predicting results of the Research Excellence Framework using departmental h-Indexcited by 1
- 2015Predicting Results of the Research Excellence Framework using Departmental h-Index -- Revisitedcited by 1
- 2016Is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration? An analysis based on data from F1000Prime and normalized citation scorescited by 1
- 2017Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime datacited by 1
- 2018Granularity of algorithmically constructed publication-level classifications of research publications: Identification of topicscited by 1
- 2018Field normalization of scientometric indicatorscited by 1
50 most cited of 58 All 58 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.
1 paper.