REVIEW 1 cited by
Mining Asymmetric Intertextuality
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
Mining Asymmetric Intertextuality
read the original abstract
This paper introduces a new task in Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Digital Humanities (DH): Mining Asymmetric Intertextuality. Asymmetric intertextuality refers to one-sided relationships between texts, where one text cites, quotes, or borrows from another without reciprocation. These relationships are common in literature and historical texts, where a later work references aclassical or older text that remain static. We propose a scalable and adaptive approach for mining asymmetric intertextuality, leveraging a split-normalize-merge paradigm. In this approach, documents are split into smaller chunks, normalized into structured data using LLM-assisted metadata extraction, and merged during querying to detect both explicit and implicit intertextual relationships. Our system handles intertextuality at various levels, from direct quotations to paraphrasing and cross-document influence, using a combination of metadata filtering, vector similarity search, and LLM-based verification. This method is particularly well-suited for dynamically growing corpora, such as expanding literary archives or historical databases. By enabling the continuous integration of new documents, the system can scale efficiently, making it highly valuable for digital humanities practitioners in literacy studies, historical research and related fields.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Beyond Similarity: Grounded Agentic Extraction and Expert-Adjudicated Evaluation of Intertextuality in Classical Chinese Histories
A tool-constrained LLM extracts span-grounded, typology-labeled intertextual pairs; expert-adjudicated validation and a 65,380-comparison run across the Twenty-Four Histories yield stable citation composition but decl...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.