 good model of citation influence could suggest a model of hypertext link importance. This could improve measures of the importance of web pages, such as PageRank [@Qi:2007:MSD:1244408.1244418].

Improved recommender systems: Researchers often need help identifying relevant work that they should read. Filtering out less relevant citations might help paper recommender systems [@MEET:MEET14504701330; @springerlink:10.1007/978-3-642-23535-1_35].

Related work {#related-work.unnumbered}
============

The idea that the mere counting of citations is dubious is not new [@chubin1975content]: The field of *citation context analysis* has a long history dating back to the early days of citation indexing. There is a wide variety of reasons for a researcher to cite a source and many ways of categorizing them. For instance, identified fifteen such reasons, including giving credit for related work, correcting a work, and criticizing previous work.

For articles in the field of high energy physics, distinguished four major classes of polar opposite pairs, conceptual–operational, organic–perfunctory, evolutionary–juxtapositional, and confirmative–negational. They found that the fraction of negational references, i.e., citations indicating that the cited source is wrong, is not negligible (14%).

presented one of the first automatic citation indexing systems (CiteSeer). It could parse citations and use them to compute similarities between documents.

might have implemented the first automated classification systems for citations. They used over 200 manually selected rules to classify citations in one of 35 categories.

Machine learning methods for automatic classification can be applied to the text of a citing document. distinguish categories of citations that can be identified via linguistic cues in the text. They are able to classify citations into one of four categories (weak, positive, contrast, neutral) with an average of 68%. For a classification in three categories (weakness, positive, neutral), they get an average of 71%. Their classifier relies on 892 manually selected cue phrases, such as whether the citation is a self-citation, the location of the citation in the text, and manually acquired verb clusters.

annotated a corpus of 43 open-access full-text biomedical articles. They built classifiers using Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Multinomial Na
good model of citation influence could suggest a exemplar of hypertext liaison importance. This could improve measures of the importance of web page, such as PageRank   [ @Qi:2007: MSD:1244408.1244418 ]. 

 Improved recommender systems: research worker often need help identify relevant work that they should read. trickle out less relevant citations might help newspaper recommender systems   [ @MEET: MEET14504701330; @springerlink:10.1007/978 - 3 - 642 - 23535 - 1_35 ]. 

 Related work { # related-work.unnumbered } 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 The idea that the mere count of citations is dubious is not new   [ @chubin1975content ]: The discipline of * citation context analysis * hold a farseeing history dating back to the early day of citation indexing. There is a wide variety show of reasons for a researcher to cite a source and many ways of categorizing them. For instance, identified fifteen such reasons, including giving credit for related work, correcting a work, and criticizing previous employment. 

 For articles in the field of gamey department of energy purgative, distinguished four major classes of polar opposite pairs, conceptual – operational, organic – perfunctory, evolutionary – juxtapositional, and collateral – negational. They found that the fraction of negational references, i.e., citations indicating that the cited source is wrong, is not negligible (14 %). 

 presented one of the first automatic citation indexing systems (CiteSeer). It could parse citations and practice them to compute similarity between document. 

 might have implemented the first automated classification system for citations. They used over 200   manually selected rule to classify citations in one of 35   categories. 

 Machine learning method acting for automatic classification can be apply to the textbook of a citing document. distinguish categories of citations that can be identify via linguistic cues in the textbook. They are able to classify citations into one of four categories (decrepit, positive, line, neutral) with an average of 68% . For a classification in three categories (helplessness, positive, neutral), they get an average of 71% . Their classifier relies on 892   manually selected clue phrases, such as whether the citation is a self - quotation, the location of the citation in the text, and manually acquired verb clusters. 

 annotated a corpus of 43   candid - access full - text biomedical articles. They built classifiers use Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Multinomial Na
 gold model of citation infuuence could suytest a model of hypeftext link importance. This cluod imkgove measures of the kmportancv of web pagew, such as PefeRank [@Ql:2007:ISD:1244408.1244418].

Ijiroveb cecommender sysjems: Researcvers often neeg fepp identifying relevant work that trey shoilf read. Filterigg olt lesa relevant citations might help paler recmmmender systrms [@MEET:MEET14504701330; @springerlink:10.1007/978-3-642-23535-1_35].

Repatef work {#related-work.knnumbered}
============

Tye iqwa that the oere countpug of citatjons is dubious is not new [@chubiv1975contznt]: The fieod of *witation coitext wnalysis* has a long vistory dating back tp tie eqrly days of citation indexing. There is a wide vdrnety of reasons for a rwsearwher to zute a aonrcs and lanb ways of cztegorizing them. For instance, odqbtified fiftesn sucr weasons, including giving credit for reldtes work, correcting a worj, and criticizing pregious worh.

For articles in the field of high energy physics, distmneuiwhcd fuyr major classes of polar opposite pairs, concepehak–oierational, organig–perfunctory, evoluyilnsty–juxtapositioval, anb cknfirmative–negatiojal. Thei foune that tht fravtion of negational referenxes, i.e., citatpons indicating that tke cited souxce is wronb, is not negligible (14%).

prerentsd one of tje first zjtomatic citatiov ikdefing sysudms (CiteSeer). It cjuld parsx citctions avd uxe thei to compuhe similarities between focumgnts.

micht have ilplemented the first automated rkassificatiom vysnems for eitatipns. They used over 200 manually selectzd rulds to clasaify civations in oge of 35 categorhgs.

Machine leacning metrods for automagkc classificatoon can bv cpplied ti the text of a cibing akcument. distingbnsy categories of cigatyojs trdt can be idantiwiea via uinguisunc guer in the text. They are atle fo classify citatipnf into obe of fotr categories (weak, positive, conurast, ieutrau) witn ag average of 68%. For a classificafion in tjrec categories (reakkess, positive, ueutral), they get an average of 71%. Their clessifier relies on 892 manoally selected cue phtasts, such as whxther ehe citathon is a self-citatiob, the location of the citation in the fext, atd majually acquired verb clusters.

annotated a corpus of 43 open-access full-text biimedicel articles. Tgey nuilt cjcssifiews udmng Support Vectog Machine (SVM) and Multinomial Na
good model of citation influence could suggest of link importance. could improve measures pages, as PageRank [@Qi:2007:MSD:1244408.1244418]. recommender systems: Researchers need help identifying relevant work that should read. Filtering out less relevant citations might help paper recommender systems [@MEET:MEET14504701330; Related work {#related-work.unnumbered} ============ The idea that the mere counting of citations is is new The of *citation context analysis* has a long history dating back to the early days of citation There is a wide variety of reasons for researcher to cite a and many ways of categorizing For identified fifteen reasons, giving for related work, a work, and criticizing previous work. For articles in the field of high energy physics, distinguished four classes of pairs, conceptual–operational, evolutionary–juxtapositional, confirmative–negational. found that the negational references, i.e., citations indicating that is wrong, is not negligible (14%). presented one the first citation indexing systems (CiteSeer). It could citations and use them to compute similarities between might have implemented the first automated classification systems for citations. They used over 200 manually to classify citations in of 35 categories. learning for classification be applied the text of a citing document. distinguish categories of citations that be identified via linguistic cues in the text. They are classify into one of categories (weak, positive, contrast, with average of 68%. For in categories they an of 71%. Their classifier on 892 manually selected cue such as whether the location of the citation in the text, and acquired verb clusters. annotated a corpus of open-access full-text biomedical articles. They built classifiers using Support Vector Machine (SVM) Multinomial Na
 good model of citation influeNce could suGgest A moDel Of HypeRtexT link importancE. this Could improve measures of The imPoRTancE Of Web paGes, such AS PAGERaNk [@qi:2007:mSD:1244408.1244418].

imPRoVed reComMender sYstems: ReseArcHeRs often need hELp IdentifyinG reLevant work thAt tHey shoUlD reAD. FiltEriNg out Less reLEvant cItations mIgHT help pAPer recoMMEnDer sYstems [@MEET:MEET14504701330; @sprINgERlink:10.1007/978-3-642-23535-1_35].

Related woRk {#relaTeD-WoRK.UnnUmbEred}
============

The ideA tHat thE Mere couNTiNG OF ciTAtions is dubioUs is not new [@cHUbiN1975conteNt]: the FIeld of *CitatIoN ConText analysiS* has A long histOry datINg back tO The earlY days oF ciTatIon iNDeXiNg. THeRE is A WiDe vARieTy of reasOnS fOr a reSearCHER To ciTe a SourCe and Many ways of catEgoRiziNG thEm. For InstaNce, iDeNtifiEd fiftEen suCh Reasons, includinG givIng credit For ReLatEd Work, cORrectiNg a WorK, and criTicizinG PreViOUS WoRk.

For articles in the FiELD oF high eneRgy phySIcS, dIStinguisHeD foUr maJOR clasSes oF PoLar opposIte paiRS, cOnCeptual–OpEratioNaL, orGanIc–perFUnctOry, evoLutionarY–juxtAPositional, and cONfirmative–negATiONAl. tHey fOunD that the fraCtioN Of neGatiONaL reFErencEs, i.e., cItATiONs indicating that the CiTed souRce is Wrong, is not negLigible (14%).

preSENTed one of The fIRsT Automatic citatIon inDexing systEMs (CiteSeEr). It cOuld parsE citationS ANd use theM to ComPutE siMILaRities between DOCumeNtS.

might hAve ImplemeNteD thE fiRst AuTomated clAssificaTiOn SyStEms For ciTAtions. ThEy UseD oVer 200 ManuaLLy seleCted rUles To ClASsiFy citatIOnS IN one Of 35 CaTegoRieS.

MAchinE leaRNinG methodS for automAtiC ClasSiFiCation cAn be applied to ThE text of a ciTiNg dOcumenT. DIstinguiSh categories of citations THat can bE idEntifIed vIa linguisTic Cues in The TExt. TheY are abLe to cLaSsiFY CitatIONs IntO oNe of four caTEGorIes (weAk, PosiTive, conTrast, neutral) with an AVerAge of 68%. For a clasSifIcatION iN thREe CAteGoRIes (WEAkness, positive, nEutral), they GeT An Average of 71%. THEir ClAssifieR relies On 892 manUAlly selEcted cue pHrases, sucH aS wheTHEr tHe citation Is a self-cItation, thE LocatIOn Of the CitAtion iN tHe tExt, anD manuaLLy aCquirEd verb ClUsters.

AnnotAtEd a corpuS of 43 open-access full-text biOmedicAl artIclEs. They buiLt cLAssIfiers usiNg SuPport VectoR MaChiNe (SVM) And mUltinOmiaL na
 good model of citation in fluence co uld s ugg est  a  mod el o f hypertext li n k im portance. This could i mprov em easu r es  of t he impo r ta n c e o fwe b p ag e s,  such  as  PageRa nk [@Qi:20 07: MS D:1244408.12 4 44 18].

Impr ove d recommende r s ystems :Res e arche rsoften  needh elp id entifying  r e levant work th a t  t heyshould read. Filt e ri n g out less rel evantci t at i o nsmig ht help pa pe r rec o mmender sy s t e ms[ @MEET:MEET145 04701330; @ s pri ngerli nk :10 . 1007/9 78-3- 64 2 -23 535-1_35].
Rel ated work  {#rel a ted-wor k .unnumb ered}=== === ==== = =
T heid e a t h at  th e  me re count in gof ci tati o n s is d ubi ousis no t new [@chubi n19 75co n ten t]: T he fi eldof  *cit ationconte xt  analysis* hasa lo ng histor y d at ing  b ack t o  the e arl y d ays ofcitatio n  in de x i n g.  There is a wide v ar i e ty  of reas ons fo r  a  r e searcher  t o c itea sourc e an d  m any ways  of ca t eg or izing t he m. For  i nst anc e, id e ntif ied fi fteen su ch re a sons, includin g  giving credi t  f o r  r e late d w ork, correc ting a wo rk,a nd  cr i ticiz ing p re v io u s work.

For articl es  in th e fie ld of high en ergy physi c s ,  disting uish e df our major clas ses o f polar op p osite pa irs,conceptu al–operat i o nal, org ani c–p erf unc t o ry , evolutionar y – juxt ap osition al,  and co nfi rma tiv e–n eg ational.They fou nd  t ha tthe  frac t ion of n eg ati on alrefer e nces,i.e.,  cit at io n s i ndicati n gt h at t he  c ited  so ur ce is  wro n g,is notnegligibl e ( 1 4%). 
pr esented  one of the f ir st automat ic  ci tation i ndexingsystems (CiteSeer). Itc ould pa rse  cita tion s and use  th em tocom p ute si milari tiesbe twe e n  docu m e nt s.
m ight havei m ple mente dthefirst a utomated classific a tio n systems for  ci tati o n s.  Th e yu sed  o v er2 0 0 manually sele cted rules  t o  c lassify ci t ati on s in on e of 35  cate g ories.
Machinelearningme thod s for  automatic  classif ication c a n bea pp liedtothe te xt  of  a ci ting d o cum ent.distin gu ish ca tegor ie s of cit ations that can be iden tified  vialin guistic c ues inthe text.  The y are able  to  cl assif y c i tatio ns i n to  on e  of f ourc ategories (w eak , po sitive, con t r a st,  neut ral )  withan a verage of 68%. Fo r  a classificat ioni n  th ree cate go ries (weakness , p os i t ive, neu tr al), they g et an av er a ge of  71%.Theirclassif i e rr elieson 8 92manuallysel ec t ed cueph ra s es, su ch a swhethe r thec itat i o n is a self-cita tion, t he lo c ati on of  t he cita t ionin the tex t, and manu ally a cqui red v erb clu st ers.
ann ot ated a cor p us of 43open- accessfu ll-t ext  biome dica l artic les.  T hey  built cl a s si f ie rs usi ng S uppor tVect or Machin e  (SVM) a ndM ultinom ia l N a 
 good_model of_citation influence could suggest_a model_of_hypertext link_importance._This could improve_measures of the_importance of web pages,_such as PageRank [@Qi:2007:MSD:1244408.1244418].

Improved_recommender_systems: Researchers often need help identifying relevant work that they should read. Filtering out_less_relevant citations_might_help_paper recommender systems [@MEET:MEET14504701330; @springerlink:10.1007/978-3-642-23535-1_35].

Related work_{#related-work.unnumbered}
============

The idea that the mere_counting of_citations is dubious is not new [@chubin1975content]: The field_of_*citation context analysis*_has a long history dating back to the early_days of citation indexing. There is_a wide variety_of_reasons_for a researcher to_cite a source and many ways_of categorizing them. For instance, identified_fifteen such reasons, including giving credit for_related work, correcting a work, and_criticizing previous work.

For articles in_the field_of high energy physics, distinguished_four major classes_of polar_opposite pairs, conceptual–operational,_organic–perfunctory, evolutionary–juxtapositional, and confirmative–negational. They found_that the fraction_of negational references, i.e., citations indicating_that_the cited source_is_wrong,_is not_negligible (14%).

presented one_of_the first_automatic_citation indexing systems (CiteSeer). It could_parse_citations and use them to compute similarities_between documents.

might have implemented_the_first automated classification systems_for citations. They used over_200 manually selected rules to classify citations_in one_of 35 categories.

Machine_learning methods for automatic classification can be applied to the text_of a citing document. distinguish categories_of citations that can_be identified_via_linguistic cues in_the_text. They_are able to classify citations into one_of four_categories (weak, positive, contrast, neutral) with_an average of 68%._For_a classification in three categories (weakness,_positive, neutral), they get an average_of 71%. Their classifier relies_on_892 manually_selected cue phrases, such as_whether the citation is a self-citation,_the location of_the citation in the text, and manually_acquired_verb clusters.

annotated a corpus of 43 open-access_full-text_biomedical articles. They built classifiers using_Support_Vector_Machine (SVM) and Multinomial Na