Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

Named-Entity Recognition in the Crime Domain (CrimeNER): Case Study and Dataset

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read CrimeNERdb is introduced as the first large benchmark for named-entity recognition on general crime documents, with 1,568 annotated texts.

desk verdict A genuinely useful new crime-NER dataset, but the quality claim rests on an unverified gold standard; the missing inter-annotator agreement is fixable and essential. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.02150 v2 pith:UHYS2CQ5 submitted 2026-03-02 cs.CL cs.AIcs.DB

Miguel Lopez-Duran , Julian Fierrez , Aythami Morales , Daniel DeAlcala , Gonzalo Mancera , Javier Irigoyen , Ruben Tolosana , Oscar Delgado
show 2 more authors
Francisco Jurado Alvaro Ortigosa
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.DB
keywords named-entityrecognitioncrimedomaindatasetcreationzero-shotlearningfew-shotannotationterrorismlawenforcement
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Law enforcement agencies need to extract entities like crimes, suspects, and logistics from text, but general crime-domain NER has lacked annotated data. This paper introduces CrimeNERdb, a publicly available dataset of 1,568 documents drawn from public press releases and terrorist event reports, annotated with a two-level hierarchy: 5 coarse entity types and 22 fine-grained types. The authors argue this is the first and largest such dataset. To demonstrate quality, they run zero-shot and few-shot NER experiments with state-of-the-art models, reporting scores comparable to other low-resource benchmarks. If the dataset is sound, it gives the NLP community a common testbed for crime-domain information extraction.

What carries the argument

The central object is the CrimeNERdb dataset itself, with its two-level entity annotation scheme (5 coarse types, 22 fine-grained types) and support for nested entities. The evaluation is built on an episodic few-shot protocol (n-way, k-shot) and zero-shot prompting, which serves as a surrogate for measuring annotation quality when no prior crime-domain NER benchmarks exist.

What would settle it

A re-annotation of a random sample of CrimeNERdb documents by independent annotators, measuring inter-annotator agreement (e.g., F1 or Cohen's kappa on spans and labels). If agreement is low or near chance, the dataset's quality claim would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

CrimeNERdb contains 1,568 manually annotated documents with over 1,377 crime spans, 1,416 actor spans, and other entity types, including nested annotations. The authors claim it is the first and biggest dataset for NER on general crime documents and terrorist reports. They define a coarse hierarchy (Crime, Actor, Agent, Agency, Logistic) and fine-grained subtypes (e.g., Terrorism, Fraud, Criminal Person, Law Enforcement), and they validate the resource through experiments: fully supervised models, zero-shot LLM prompting, and few-shot episodic training. Their conclusion is that model performance on CrimeNERdb is comparable to other low-resource NER benchmarks, indicating the annotations are

Load-bearing premise

The manual annotations are treated as a reliable gold standard, but the paper reports no inter-annotator agreement or adjudication; if annotators disagree substantially, the quality scores and the benchmark's validity become unclear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • CrimeNERdb provides a public benchmark for evaluating NER models on general crime text, filling a gap left by cybercrime-only datasets.
  • The two-level taxonomy (coarse and fine-grained) lets systems tune precision versus specificity, and supports nested NER evaluation.
  • Zero- and few-shot results on this dataset give a baseline for future low-resource crime-domain NER research.
  • The authors intend the dataset to support downstream tasks like crime-document classification and retrieval.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the dataset draws only from English-language US sources, its entity taxonomy may be biased toward US legal and policing structures; a multilingual extension would need to adapt labels like 'Agency' and 'Agent'.
  • The reported F1 scores for Crime entities are lower than for Logistic, suggesting the crime-type definitions are the hardest to annotate consistently; future versions could benefit from more detailed guidelines or adjudication.
  • The absence of inter-annotator agreement statistics means the quality claim rests entirely on model performance; a small re-annotation study could quantify reproducibility.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces CrimeNERdb, a manually annotated corpus of 1,568 short documents (100–500 characters) drawn from U.S. Department of Justice press releases (2009–2018) and 2021 Global Terrorism Database reports. The annotation scheme has two levels — five coarse types (Crime, Actor, Agent, Agency, Logistic; the abstract counts vary) and a claimed 22 fine-grained types — and supports nested spans. The authors evaluate dataset quality via zero- and few-shot NER using NuNER, CONTaiNER, and several LLMs over 100 episodes (coarse and fine granularities), and conclude that the data are of high quality and constitute the first/biggest general-crime NER dataset, released on GitHub.

Significance. Should the resource hold up under scrutiny, it addresses a genuine gap: general (non-cyber) crime NER with realistic documents has no established public benchmark, and CrimeNERdb's 1,568 short documents plus a two-level, nested-capable taxonomy would be a useful testbed for zero/few-shot NER. The paper's strengths are that the evaluation uses well-known external baselines (NuNER, CONTaiNER, GPT-4o-Mini, GPT-4.1-Mini, Gemini-2.5-Flash) and public frameworks (LLMNER, Doccano), the 100-episode protocol with reported variance is a step toward reproducibility, and the database is claimed to be public. However, the central claim of annotation quality is load-bearing and currently rests on an unvalidated gold standard and a non-sequitur from model scores; the publication-worthiness of the benchmark depends on adding reliability evidence and fixing the internal inconsistencies.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.2] The annotation-process section describes Doccano labeling of coarse/fine types and nested spans, but reports no inter-annotator agreement, no adjudication procedure, and no consistency statistics. Section 4.2 itself concedes that the Crime coarse type is 'more subject to interpretation and prone to small differences between the model predictions and the gold annotations.' Since every F1 in Tables 2–4 and the 'high quality' conclusion in Sections 1 and 5 are defined against this gold standard, the absence of reliability evidence makes the central claim unverifiable. Please add per-type (coarse and fine) span-level and label-level agreement measures (e.g., κ) from at least a double-annotation subsample, plus an adjudication protocol.
  2. [§5 (and §1, contribution 3)] The reasoning 'these models achieve a similar performance on Zero and Few-Shot settings compared to other benchmarks of Zero and Few-Shot NER, which shows that the annotated data is of great quality' is a non-sequitur. Reported F1 is 30–65 on coarse types and 10–35 on fine-grained types (Tables 2–4); nothing about these numbers or their parity with other benchmarks entails annotation quality, because model performance depends on task difficulty, model capacity, and label noise. No benchmark F1 values are actually quoted for comparison. Quality needs direct evidence (IAA/adjudication) or a controlled test (e.g., same models on perturbed/randomized labels). As written, the central quality claim is unsupported.
  3. [§3.2 / §4] CrimeNERdb explicitly contains nested spans ('District of Columbia' inside 'Attorney General for the District of Columbia'), but the paper never states how overlapping spans were scored in the zero/few-shot evaluations. Exact-match span F1 is undefined without a policy for nested/overlapping spans; the LLM and PLM baselines presumably emit flat spans. The reader cannot reproduce Tables 2–4 or interpret part-of-credit/penalty behavior. Please state the scoring protocol (e.g., best-match per template, outermost-only, token-level micro-F1) and whether the released data format preserves the nesting.
  4. [§3.2–§3.3, §5; Table 4 vs §4.2] Internal inconsistencies affect both taxonomy and results. (a) The fine-grained types listed in §3.2 sum to 25 (10 Crime, 4 Actor, 3 Agent, 3 Agency, 5 Logistic); the text instead reports 21 (arXiv abstract), 22 (intro, abstracts, §3.3, §5), and §5 says Crime has 8 fine types (which would total 23). (b) §4.2 states GPT-4o-Mini 'outperforms both CONTaiNER, GPT-4.1-Mini and Gemini-2.5-Flash on F1-score in 1 and 5-shot settings,' but Table 4 shows GPT-4.1-Mini with higher F1 (50.84 vs 42.55; 61.93 vs 60.09) and GPT-4o-Mini also not below Gemini in 5-shot only — and the 'Inter/Intra' columns are undefined. These contradictions must be resolved.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.3, Tables 2–4, Fig. 3] Pervasive typos and table-formatting defects: 'NER con general crime documents' (§3.3), 'enttity' and 'entiy spans' (§3.3), 'comparation' (§4.2); Table 2 renders 'Agent51.64'; Table 3 renders 'Crime 511.57±6.76' (missing space); Table 4's header shows six column labels with five data values and 'Inter/Intra' undefined; Fig. 3(b)'s caption attributes fine-grained zero-shot to GPT-4o-Mini while §4.1 states GPT-4.1-Mini was used for that experiment. A thorough proofreading pass is needed.
  2. [§1 (contributions)] The contribution bullet reads 'manually annotated more than 1.5K sentences' while §3.3 and the abstracts say 1,568 'documents.' Since each selected item is a 100–500-character snippet, the document/sentence terminology should be aligned throughout.
  3. [§1, §3.3] The 'first and biggest dataset' claim is asserted without a supporting comparison. Provide a table of existing crime/cybercrime NER corpora (e.g., APTNER, cyber-threat-intelligence datasets, FewNERD) with corpus sizes and entity counts, or hedge the claim to 'to our knowledge.'
  4. [§4.1, Table 2] NuNER is evaluated on a subset of entity types and on the whole dataset rather than per episode, so its F1 is not directly comparable with the LLM rows. The footnote discloses this, but the prose ('NUNER performs better in general') should explicitly warn the reader to avoid a comparative reading of Table 2.
  5. [§4.1] The generation of the 100 episodes is underspecified: how were the support and query sets sampled (random vs class-balanced, query-set size)? The near-zero variance for GPT-4o-Mini (F1 σ=0.43 in Table 2) is surprising relative to other models and suggests near-identical episodes; please describe the episode construction and, if the variance is correct, explain it.
  6. [§3.2, §5] The GitHub availability claim is not backed by a URL, license, data-format description, or reference to the annotation guidelines. For a dataset contribution, specify the release location, the export format (e.g., Doccano JSONL), and the license; also state explicitly how nested spans are represented in the released files.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dataset, its manual labels, and the external-model evaluations are independent of the paper's claims.

full rationale

CrimeNERdb is a manually annotated resource; there is no derivation chain in which an output is defined in terms of an input or a fitted constant is renamed as a prediction. The central contributions are empirical: a dataset, an entity-type hierarchy, and benchmark scores. Section 3.2 describes annotation with Doccano and nested spans; Section 3.3 reports corpus statistics; Section 4 evaluates pre-trained models (NuNER, CONTaiNER) and external LLMs (GPT-4o-Mini, GPT-4.1-Mini, Gemini-2.5-Flash) on episode splits. These models were not fitted to the dataset's quality claim; support/query splits are a standard few-shot protocol, and NUNER is deliberately trained on disjoint crime entity types for zero-shot evaluation. The phrase "Results show the high quality of the annotated documents" (Section 5) is an interpretation of held-out F1 scores against manual labels, not a quantity that is equal to the labels by construction. The self-citations ([22],[23],[28],[29]) point to the authors' prior work on document layout and bias, none of which supplies a load-bearing premise or uniqueness theorem for the current dataset claim. A real validity concern is the absence of inter-annotator agreement or adjudication statistics in Section 3.2, which would make "high quality" stronger; however, that is a reproducibility/annotation-reliability issue, not circularity. The dataset is otherwise self-contained against external benchmarks (FewNERD, CoNLL, OntoNotes), so no circularity score above 0 is warranted.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The ledger captures the fact that the central contribution is a dataset, not a derived law: there are no physical invented entities, but the paper postulates an annotation taxonomy and assumes human-label reliability. The free parameters are dataset-shaping and evaluation choices; none are fitted to produce the F1 results, but they affect what the benchmark measures. The key input pulled without independent evidence is annotation correctness (no IAA) and the implicit representativeness of the source mix.

free parameters (4)
  • Document length filter (100–500 chars)
    Hand-chosen to make annotation affordable and source-mix comparable; directly determines which documents are in CrimeNER-db (§3.1).
  • Source selection counts (~1.2k DOJ, ~300 GTD) = ~1,200 / ~300
    Hand-picked to balance entity coverage, not sampled randomly; affects class distribution (§3.1).
  • Evaluation episode count (100 episodes) = 100
    Chosen for benchmark; standard practice but arbitrary; determines variance of reported F1 (§4).
  • Fine-tuning duration for CONTaiNER (1 epoch) = 1 epoch
    Fixed without search; result might change with more epochs (§4.2).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The manually produced annotations are a reliable gold standard without inter-annotator agreement.
    Invoked throughout §3.3 and §4/§5; no IAA is presented, so quality is assumed.
  • domain assumption DOJ press releases (2009–2018) and GTD 2021 event descriptions represent general real-world crime documents.
    §3.1 selection rationale; the dataset is defined by this source mix.
  • ad hoc to paper Entity type definitions are complete and mutually consistent despite nested annotations.
    §3.2 defines 5 coarse/22 fine but listed labels sum to 25; the taxonomy is not independently validated.
  • domain assumption Zero/few-shot model F1 comparable to other benchmarks is a valid measure of annotation quality.
    §5 conclusion; no benchmark comparison numbers are provided.
invented entities (1)
  • CrimeNER two-level entity taxonomy (coarse + fine labels) independent evidence
    purpose: Defines the annotation scheme for the dataset; organizes tokens into crime, actor, agent, agency, and logistic categories.
    The released annotated corpus provides tangible instances of each label, so the taxonomy is falsifiable/usable; it is still a new conceptual structure introduced by the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Named-Entity Recognition in the Crime Domain (CrimeNER): Case Study and Dataset." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UHYS2CQ5

@misc{pith2026260302150,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Named-Entity Recognition in the Crime Domain (CrimeNER): Case Study and Dataset},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UHYS2CQ5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.02150}
}
read the original abstract

The extraction of critical information from crime-related documents is a crucial task for law enforcement agencies. The extraction of this information can be interpreted as a Named-Entity Recognition (NER) task. However, there is a considerable lack of adequately annotated data on general real-world crime scenarios. To address this issue, we present CrimeNER, a case study of crime-related NER, and a general crime-related Named-Entity Recognition database (CrimeNER-db), consisting of more than 1.5K annotated documents extracted from public reports of terrorist attacks and the US Department of Justice's press notes. We define 4 coarse types of crime entity and 21 fine-grained entity types. We address the quality of the presented database with experiments using fully supervised finetuned general NER models and zero- and few-shot experiments to address the generalization capabilities. The database is available on GitHub.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.02150 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example of an annotated document on Doccano with both coarse and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Fine-grained entity span distribution of CrimeNERdb. PER and ORG [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Zero and Few-Shot mean F1-scores for coarse entity types with GPT-4.1- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. CrimeNER Demo: Named-Entity Recognition in the Crime Domain

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    CrimeNER Demo is a public platform for extracting crime entities from documents with coarse and fine-grained labels, powered by fine-tuned transformer NER models.

  2. Comparative Study of Domain-adapted VLMs for General Document Visual Question Answering

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Few-shot adaptation with 50 target-domain samples enables VLMs finetuned on different DocVQA domains to match or surpass fully supervised counterparts, revealing visual understanding as the primary bottleneck.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 8 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

    Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S., et al.: GPT-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Ali, A., Noah, S.A.M., Zakaria, L.Q.: A BERT-based model: improving crime news documents classification through adopting pre-trained language models (2023)

    2023

  3. [3]

    In: Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing

    Bogdanov, S., Constantin, A., Bernard, T., Crabbé, B., Bernard, E.P.: NuNER: Entity recognition encoder pre-training via LLM-annotated data. In: Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. pp. 11829–11841 (2024)

    2024

  4. [4]

    BMC bioinformatics14(1), 54 (2013)

    Campos, D., Matos, S., Oliveira, J.L.: Gimli: open source and high-performance biomedical name recognition. BMC bioinformatics14(1), 54 (2013)

    2013

  5. [5]

    In: Proceedings of the international joint workshop on natural language processing in biomedicine and its applications (NLPBA/BioNLP)

    Collier, N., Ohta, T., Tsuruoka, Y., Tateisi, Y., Kim, J.D.: Introduction to the bio-entity recognition task at JNLPBA. In: Proceedings of the international joint workshop on natural language processing in biomedicine and its applications (NLPBA/BioNLP). pp. 73–78 (2004)

    2004

  6. [6]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261 (2025)

    Comanici, G., Bieber, E., Schaekermann, M., Pasupat, I., Sachdeva, N., Dhillon, I., Blistein, M., Ram, O., Zhang, D., Rosen, E., et al.: Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    In: Proceedings of the 24th Workshop on Biomedical Language Processing

    Dao, A., Teranishi, H., Matsumoto, Y., Boudin, F., Aizawa, A.: Overcoming data scarcity in named entity recognition: Synthetic data generation with large language models. In: Proceedings of the 24th Workshop on Biomedical Language Processing. pp. 328–340 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    In: Proceedings of the 60th An- nual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

    Das, S.S.S., Katiyar, A., Passonneau, R.J., Zhang, R.: CONTaiNER: Few-shot named entity recognition via contrastive learning. In: Proceedings of the 60th An- nual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). pp. 6338–6353 (2022)

    2022

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Ding, N., Xu, G., Chen, Y., Wang, X., Han, X., Xie, P., Zheng, H., Liu, Z.: Few- NERD: A few-shot named entity recognition dataset. In: Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natura...

    2021

  2. [10]

    In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Cyber Se- curity and Resilience (CSR)

    Evangelatos, P., Iliou, C., Mavropoulos, T., Apostolou, K., Tsikrika, T., Vrochidis, S., Kompatsiaris, I.: Named entity recognition in cyber threat intelligence using transformer-based models. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Cyber Se- curity and Resilience (CSR). pp....

    2021

  3. [11]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.01449 (2024)

    Faysse, M., Sibille, H., Wu, T., Omrani, B., Viaud, G., Hudelot, C., Colombo, P.: ColPali: Efficient document retrieval with vision language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.01449 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    In: International Conference on Cryptology & Network Security with Machine Learning

    Garg, R., Gupta, A., Srivastava, A.: A comprehensive review on transforming secu- rity and privacy with NLP. In: International Conference on Cryptology & Network Security with Machine Learning. pp. 147–159. Springer (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics

    Guo, Q., Dong, Y., Tian, L., Kang, Z., Zhang, Y., Wang, S.: BANER: Boundary- aware LLMs for few-shot named entity recognition. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics. pp. 10375–10389 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    In: Proceedingsofthe2022conferenceofthenorthAmericanchapteroftheassociation for computational linguistics: human language technologies

    Hu, Y., Hosseini, M., Parolin, E.S., Osorio, J., Khan, L., Brandt, P., D’Orazio, V.: Conflibert: A pre-trained language model for political conflict and violence. In: Proceedingsofthe2022conferenceofthenorthAmericanchapteroftheassociation for computational linguistics: human l...

    2022

  7. [15]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12545 (2025)

    Ihugba, B.J., Nasrin, A., Wu, L., Li, L., Qian, L., Dong, X.: Knowledge acqui- sition on mass-shooting events via LLMs for AI-Driven justice. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12545 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Advances in neural information processing systems35, 22199–22213 (2022)

    Kojima, T., Gu, S.S., Reid, M., Matsuo, Y., Iwasawa, Y.: Large language models are zero-shot reasoners. Advances in neural information processing systems35, 22199–22213 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Artificial Intelligence in Medicine156, 102970 (2024)

    Košprdić, M., Prodanović, N., Ljajić, A., Bašaragin, B., Milošević, N.: From zero to hero: Harnessing transformers for biomedical named entity recognition in zero-and few-shot contexts. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine156, 102970 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    Terrorism and political violence19(2), 181–204 (2007)

    LaFree, G., Dugan, L.: Introducing the global terrorism database. Terrorism and political violence19(2), 181–204 (2007)

    2007

  11. [19]

    Database2016(2016)

    Li, J., Sun, Y., Johnson, R.J., Sciaky, D., Wei, C.H., Leaman, R., Davis, A.P., Mattingly, C.J., Wiegers, T.C., Lu, Z.: BioCreative V CDR task corpus: a resource for chemical disease relation extraction. Database2016(2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Li, J., Chiu, B., Feng, S., Wang, H.: Few-shot named entity recognition via meta- learning.IEEETransactionsonKnowledgeandDataEngineering34(9),4245–4256 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    In: Proceedings of the web conference 2020

    Li, J., Shang, S., Shao, L.: Metaner: Named entity recognition with meta-learning. In: Proceedings of the web conference 2020. pp. 429–440 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    In: International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition

    Lopez-Duran, M., Fierrez, J., Morales, A., Tolosana, R., Delgado-Mohatar, O., Ortigosa, A.: Benchmarking graph neural networks for document layout analysis in public affairs. In: International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition. pp. 21–35. Springer (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    In: International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition

    Mancera, G., Morales, A., Fierrez, J., Tolosana, R., Peña, A., Lopez-Duran, M., Jurado, F., Ortigosa, A.: PBa-LLM: Privacy-and bias-aware NLP using named- entity recognition (NER). In: International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition. pp. 3–20. Springer (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security8(2), 339–344 (2008)

    Mansouri, A., Affendey, L.S., Mamat, A.: Named entity recognition approaches. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security8(2), 339–344 (2008)

    2008

  17. [25]

    In: Proceedings of the 2018 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: Human language technolo- gies, volume 1 (long papers)

    Moon, S., Neves, L., Carvalho, V.: Multimodal named entity recognition for short social media posts. In: Proceedings of the 2018 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: Human language technolo- gies, volume 1 (long papers). pp...

    2018

  18. [26]

    ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology14(5), 1–46 (2023)

    Moscato, V., Postiglione, M., Sperlí, G.: Few-shot named entity recognition: defini- tion, taxonomy and research directions. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology14(5), 1–46 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Nakayama, H., Kubo, T., Kamura, J., Taniguchi, Y., Liang, X.: doccano: Text annotation tool for human (2018), https://github.com/doccano/doccano, software available from https://github.com/doccano/doccano

    2018

  20. [28]

    In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

    Peña, A., Fierrez, J., Morales, A., Mancera, G., Lopez-Duran, M., Tolosana, R.: Addressing bias in LLMs: Strategies and application to fair AI-based recruitment. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. vol. 8, pp. 1976–1987 (2025)

    1976

  21. [29]

    Information Fusion108, 102398 (2024)

    Peña, A., Morales, A., Fierrez, J., Ortega-Garcia, J., Puente, I., Cordova, J., Cor- dova, G.: Continuous document layout analysis: Human-in-the-loop AI-based data curation, database, and evaluation in the domain of public affairs. Information Fusion108, 102398 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData)

    Porlou, C., Makrynioti, M., Alexiadis, A., Stavropoulos, G., Pantelis, G., Votis, K., Tzovaras, D.: Optimizing an LLM prompt for accurate data extraction from Zero- and Few-Shot Crime Named-Entity Recognition (CrimeNER) 15 firearm-related listings in dark web marketplaces. In:...

    2024

  23. [31]

    In: Proceedings of the seventh conference on Natural language learning at HLT-NAACL 2003

    Sang, E.T.K., De Meulder, F.: Introduction to the CoNLL-2003 shared task: Language-independent named entity recognition. In: Proceedings of the seventh conference on Natural language learning at HLT-NAACL 2003. pp. 142–147 (2003)

    2003

  24. [32]

    Computers12(12), 255 (2023)

    Sarzaeim, P., Mahmoud, Q.H., Azim, A., Bauer, G., Bowles, I.: A systematic re- view of using machine learning and natural language processing in smart policing. Computers12(12), 255 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    In: 2024 3rd Edition of IEEE Delhi Section Flagship Conference (DELCON)

    Savaram, P., Tabassum, S., Bandu, S., et al.: Multilingual approaches to named entity recognition. In: 2024 3rd Edition of IEEE Delhi Section Flagship Conference (DELCON). pp. 1–6. IEEE (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11157 (2023)

    Shah, A., Gullapalli, A., Vithani, R., Galarnyk, M., Chava, S.: FiNER- ORD: financial named entity recognition open research dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11157 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Briefings in Bioinformatics 22(6), bbab282 (2021)

    Song, B., Li, F., Liu, Y., Zeng, X.: Deep learning methods for biomedical named entity recognition: a survey and qualitative comparison. Briefings in Bioinformatics 22(6), bbab282 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Journal of biomedical informatics 58, S20–S29 (2015)

    Stubbs, A., Uzuner, Ö.: Annotating longitudinal clinical narratives for de- identification: The 2014 i2b2/UTHealth corpus. Journal of biomedical informatics 58, S20–S29 (2015)

    2014

  29. [37]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08035 (2024)

    Tang, Y., Hasan, R., Runkler, T.: FsPONER: Few-shot prompt optimiza- tion for named entity recognition in domain-specific scenarios. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08035 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805 (2023)

    Team, G., Anil, R., Borgeaud, S., Alayrac, J.B., Yu, J., Soricut, R., Schalkwyk, J., Dai, A.M., Hauth, A., Millican, K., et al.: Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    IEEE Access13, 206431–206446 (2025)

    Vieira, A.R., Santos, G.D.S., Melo, W.S., Rust, L.F.: Hierarchical multi-class and multi-label text classification for crime report: A traditional machine learning ap- proach. IEEE Access13, 206431–206446 (2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04528 (2024)

    Villena, F., Miranda, L., Aracena, C.: llmNER:(zero| few)-shot named en- tity recognition, exploiting the power of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04528 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Array23, 100364 (2024)

    Wang, H., Yang, W., Feng, W., Zeng, L., Gu, Z.: Threat intelligence named entity recognition techniques based on few-shot learning. Array23, 100364 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    In: 2022 IEEE 25th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (CSCWD)

    Wang, X., He, S., Xiong, Z., Wei, X., Jiang, Z., Chen, S., Jiang, J.: Aptner: A specific dataset for ner missions in cyber threat intelligence field. In: 2022 IEEE 25th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (CSCWD). pp. 1233–1238. IEEE (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Borealis (2022)

    Weischedel, R., Pradhan, S., Ramshaw, L., Palmer, M., Xue, N., Marcus, M., Taylor, A., Greenberg, C., Hovy, E., Belvin, R., et al.: OntoNotes Release 5.0. Borealis (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP)

    Yang, Y., Katiyar, A.: Simple and effective few-shot named entity recognition with structured nearest neighbor learning. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP). pp. 6365–6375 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708)11(6) (2021)

    Zadgaonkar,A.V.,Agrawal,A.J.:Anoverviewofinformationextractiontechniques for legal document analysis and processing. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708)11(6) (2021)

  38. [46]

    Expert Systems with Applications271, 126651 (2025) 16 M

    Zhang, Y., Liu, J., Zhong, X., Wu, L.: SecLMNER: A framework for enhanced named entity recognition in multi-source cybersecurity data using large language models. Expert Systems with Applications271, 126651 (2025) 16 M. Lopez-Duran, et al. Table 5: Selected examples for every ...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.