Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Document Embedding for Scientific Articles: Efficacy of Word Embeddings vs TFIDF

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2107.05151 v1 pith:G76DDIHZ submitted 2021-07-11 cs.AI

classification cs.AI
keywords embeddingsscientificwordarticlesjournalstexttfidfcontent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Over the last few years, neural network derived word embeddings became popular in the natural language processing literature. Studies conducted have mostly focused on the quality and application of word embeddings trained on public available corpuses such as Wikipedia or other news and social media sources. However, these studies are limited to generic text and thus lack technical and scientific nuances such as domain specific vocabulary, abbreviations, or scientific formulas which are commonly used in academic context. This research focuses on the performance of word embeddings applied to a large scale academic corpus. More specifically, we compare quality and efficiency of trained word embeddings to TFIDF representations in modeling content of scientific articles. We use a word2vec skip-gram model trained on titles and abstracts of about 70 million scientific articles. Furthermore, we have developed a benchmark to evaluate content models in a scientific context. The benchmark is based on a categorization task that matches articles to journals for about 1.3 million articles published in 2017. Our results show that content models based on word embeddings are better for titles (short text) while TFIDF works better for abstracts (longer text). However, the slight improvement of TFIDF for larger text comes at the expense of 3.7 times more memory requirement as well as up to 184 times higher computation times which may make it inefficient for online applications. In addition, we have created a 2-dimensional visualization of the journals modeled via embeddings to qualitatively inspect embedding model. This graph shows useful insights and can be used to find competitive journals or gaps to propose new journals.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SemCSE: Semantic Contrastive Sentence Embeddings Using LLM-Generated Summaries For Scientific Abstracts

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using multiple LLM-generated summaries of the same abstract as positive pairs trains scientific text embeddings that beat citation-trained baselines on retrieval and clustering, while the new benchmark shares its trai...

Pith tools