BAGELS: Benchmarking the Automated Generation and Extraction of Limitations from Scholarly Text

In scientific research, limitations refer to the shortcomings, constraints, or weaknesses within a study. Transparent reporting of such limitations can enhance the quality and reproducibility of research and improve public trust in science. However, authors often a) underreport them in the paper text and b) use hedging strategies to satisfy editorial requirements at the cost of readers' clarity and confidence. This underreporting behavior, along with an explosion in the number of publications, has created a pressing need to automatically extract or generate such limitations from scholarly papers. In this direction, we present a complete architecture for the computational analysis of research limitations. Specifically, we create a dataset of limitations in ACL, NeurIPS, and PeerJ papers by extracting them from papers' text and integrating them with external reviews; we propose methods to automatically generate them using a novel Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) technique; we create a fine-grained evaluation framework for generated limitations; and we provide a meta-evaluation for the proposed evaluation techniques.

FutureGen: LLM-RAG Approach to Generate the Future Work of Scientific Article

The future work section of a scientific article outlines potential research directions by identifying gaps and limitations of a current study. This section serves as a valuable resource for early-career researchers seeking unexplored areas and experienced researchers looking for new projects or collaborations. In this study, we generate future work suggestions from key sections of a scientific article alongside related papers and analyze how the trends have evolved. We experimented with various Large Language Models (LLMs) and integrated Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to enhance the generation process. We incorporate a LLM feedback mechanism to improve the quality of the generated content and propose an LLM-as-a-judge approach for evaluation. Our results demonstrated that the RAG-based approach with LLM feedback outperforms other methods evaluated through qualitative and quantitative metrics. Moreover, we conduct a human evaluation to assess the LLM as an extractor and judge. The code and dataset for this project are here, code: HuggingFace

Quantifying the Relevance of Youth Research Cited in the US Policy Documents

In recent years, there has been a growing concern and emphasis on conducting research beyond academic or scientific research communities, benefiting society at large. A well-known approach to measuring the impact of research on society is enumerating its policy citation(s). Despite the importance of research in informing policy, there is no concrete evidence to suggest the research's relevance in cited policy documents. This is concerning because it may increase the possibility of evidence used in policy being manipulated by individual, social, or political biases that may lead to inappropriate, fragmented, or archaic research evidence in policy. Therefore, it is crucial to identify the degree of relevance between research articles and citing policy documents. In this paper, we examined the scale of contextual relevance of youth-focused research in the referenced US policy documents using natural language processing techniques, state-of-the-art pre-trained Large Language Models (LLMs), and statistical analysis. Our experiments and analysis concluded that youth-related research articles that get US policy citations are mostly relevant to the citing policy documents.