{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2023:33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5","short_pith_number":"pith:33VFE5ZZ","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"deea5277390850c12a2839431ca34b175de9b289bb0b1788f7b42cd7faa703b7","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2305.14647","version":3},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Scientific Opinion Summarization: Paper Meta-review Generation Dataset, Methods, and Evaluation","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Ansel Blume, Heng Ji, Hou Pong Chan, Lu Wang, Mankeerat Sidhu, Qi Zeng","submitted_at":"2023-05-24T02:33:35Z","abstract_excerpt":"Opinions in scientific research papers can be divergent, leading to controversies among reviewers. However, most existing datasets for opinion summarization are centered around product reviews and assume that the analyzed opinions are non-controversial, failing to account for the variability seen in other contexts such as academic papers, political debates, or social media discussions. To address this gap, we propose the task of scientific opinion summarization, where research paper reviews are synthesized into meta-reviews. To facilitate this task, we introduce the ORSUM dataset covering 15,0"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2305.14647","kind":"arxiv","version":3},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CL","submitted_at":"2023-05-24T02:33:35Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"30babd34588ce522087cda20c125919653cb172616e5e2319c1c66e04ad74dcd","abstract_canon_sha256":"9607f8bd254e772ed7e897528539cddd93c8936f23ac0d6a6b11ce4d39e32b69"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.746179Z","signature_b64":"WrBKX4Lojy+Y9YNNfibTB88DHhkYYQmCQvnWYSdnhO/nChlB4TAPyMuwh6vZyXvBmWhwgNrYVCDYzWWN1tblBA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"deea5277390850c12a2839431ca34b175de9b289bb0b1788f7b42cd7faa703b7","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745676Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745676Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Scientific Opinion Summarization: Paper Meta-review Generation Dataset, Methods, and Evaluation","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Ansel Blume, Heng Ji, Hou Pong Chan, Lu Wang, Mankeerat Sidhu, Qi Zeng","submitted_at":"2023-05-24T02:33:35Z","abstract_excerpt":"Opinions in scientific research papers can be divergent, leading to controversies among reviewers. However, most existing datasets for opinion summarization are centered around product reviews and assume that the analyzed opinions are non-controversial, failing to account for the variability seen in other contexts such as academic papers, political debates, or social media discussions. To address this gap, we propose the task of scientific opinion summarization, where research paper reviews are synthesized into meta-reviews. To facilitate this task, we introduce the ORSUM dataset covering 15,0"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2305.14647","kind":"arxiv","version":3},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2305.14647/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2305.14647","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2305.14647v3","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2305.14647","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"33VFE5ZZBBIM","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRI","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"33VFE5ZZ","created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2505.14599","citing_title":"Toward Reliable Scientific Hypothesis Generation: Evaluating Truthfulness and Hallucination in Large Language Models","ref_index":57,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5","json":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/33VFE5ZZ"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/33VFE5ZZ","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2305.14647&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/33VFE5ZZBBIMCKRIHFBRZI2LC5/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T08:32:29.745731+00:00"}