mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SC4ANM: Identifying Optimal Section Combinations for Automated Novelty Prediction in Academic Papers

arXiv 2505.16330 ↗First posted 22 May 2025cs.CL cs.AI cs.DLcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Novelty is a core component of academic papers, and there are multiple perspectives on the assessment of novelty. Existing methods often focus on word or entity combinations, which provide limited insights. The content related to a paper's novelty is typically distributed across different core sections, e.g., Introduction, Methodology and Results. Therefore, exploring the optimal combination of sections for evaluating the novelty of a paper is important for advancing automated novelty assessment. In this paper, we utilize different combinations of sections from academic papers as inputs to drive language models to predict novelty scores. We then analyze the results to determine the optimal section combinations for novelty score prediction. We first employ natural language processing techniques to identify the sectional structure of academic papers, categorizing them into introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD). Subsequently, we used different combinations of these sections (e.g., introduction and methods) as inputs for pretrained language models (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs), employing novelty scores provided by human expert reviewers as ground truth labels to obtain prediction results. The results indicate that using introduction, results and discussion is most appropriate for assessing the novelty of a paper, while the use of the entire text does not yield significant results. Furthermore, based on the results of the PLMs and LLMs, the introduction and results appear to be the most important section for the task of novelty score prediction. The code and dataset for this paper can be accessed at https://github.com/njust-winchy/SC4ANM.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 May 2025.

Builds on

24 of 61 references.

References · 24

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  4. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  5. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,326
  6. 2020Longformer: The Long-Document Transformercited by 3,413
  7. 2020Big Bird: Transformers for Longer Sequencescited by 1,684
  8. 2019SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Textcited by 1,414
  9. 2018A Discourse-Aware Attention Model for Abstractive Summarization of Long Documentscited by 478
  10. 2023Large Language Models Are State-of-the-Art Evaluators of Translation Qualitycited by 420
  11. 2021LongT5: Efficient Text-To-Text Transformer for Long Sequencescited by 232
  12. 2023Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysiscited by 200
12 more
  1. 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 122
  2. 2023Large Language Models are Not Yet Human-Level Evaluators for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 70
  3. 2023GPT4 is Slightly Helpful for Peer-Review Assistance: A Pilot Studycited by 40
  4. 2024Assessing LLMs in Malicious Code Deobfuscation of Real-world Malware Campaignscited by 19
  5. 2024Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality?cited by 17
  6. 2021Enhancing Identification of Structure Function of Academic Articles Using Contextual Informationcited by 7
  7. 2018Creativity in Science and the Link to Cited References: Is the Creative Potential of Papers Reflected in their Cited References?cited by 6
  8. 2022Which structure of academic articles do referees pay more attention to?: perspective of peer review and full-text of academic articlescited by 5
  9. 2025Are the confidence scores of reviewers consistent with the review content? Evidence from top conference proceedings in AIcited by 4
  10. 2024Feature engineering vs. deep learning for paper section identification: Toward applications in Chinese medical literaturecited by 2
  11. 2023What do we know about the disruption index in scientometrics? An overview of the literaturecited by 1
  12. 2024A Content-Based Novelty Measure for Scholarly Publications: A Proof of Conceptcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 7.

8 papers.