Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Peer-review plays a critical role in the scientific writing and publication ecosystem.
Text chunking using transformation-based learning
Lance A Ramshaw and Mitchell P Marcus. 1999 · 1999
Earlier work this paper cites.
Development of the review quality instrument (rqi) for assessing peer reviews of manuscripts
Susan van Rooyen, Nick Black, and Fiona Godlee. 1999 · 1999
Earlier work this paper cites.
Argumentative zoning: Information extraction from scientific text
Simone Teufel et al. 1999 · 1999
Earlier work this paper cites.
Review of satisfaction research and measurement approaches
Tavite M Latu and André M Everett. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
The automated acquisition of topic signatures for text summarization
Chin-Yew Lin and Eduard Hovy. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data
John Lafferty, Andrew McCallum, and Fernando CN Pereira. 2001 · 2001
Earlier work this paper cites.
Author perception of peer review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction
Ellen J Weber, Patricia P Katz, Joseph F Waeckerle, and Michael L Callaham. 2002 · 2002
Earlier work this paper cites.
Measuring the reliability of qualitative text analysis data
Klaus Krippendorff. 2004 · 2004
Earlier work this paper cites.
Mining for proposal reviewers: lessons learned at the national science foundation
Seth Hettich and Michael J Pazzani. 2006 · 2006
Earlier work this paper cites.
Crfsuite: a fast implementation of conditional random fields (crfs)
Naoaki Okazaki. 2007 · 2007
Earlier work this paper cites.
The penn discourse treebank 2.0 annotation manual
Rashmi Prasad, Eleni Miltsakaki, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Aravind Joshi, Livio Robaldo, and Bonnie L Webber. 2007 · 2007
Earlier work this paper cites.
Argumentation mining: the detection, classification and structure of arguments in text
Raquel Mochales Palau and Marie-Francine Moens. 2009 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
A method for measuring helpfulness in online peer review
William Hart-Davidson, Michael McLeod, Christopher Klerkx, and Michael Wojcik. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Automatically predicting peer-review helpfulness
Wenting Xiong and Diane Litman. 2011 · 2011
Earlier work this paper cites.
Closed versus open reviewing of journal manuscripts: how far do comments differ in language use?
Lutz Bornmann, Markus Wolf, and Hans-Dieter Daniel. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality
Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
From argument diagrams to argumentation mining in texts: A survey
Andreas Peldszus and Manfred Stede. 2013 · 2013
Cited alongside, same era.
Saga: A fast incremental gradient method with support for non-strongly convex composite objectives
Aaron Defazio, Francis Bach, and Simon Lacoste-Julien. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
A linear-time bottom-up discourse parser with constraints and post-editing
Vanessa Wei Feng and Graeme Hirst. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Peer review in scientific publications: benefits, critiques, & a survival guide
Jacalyn Kelly, Tara Sadeghieh, and Khosrow Adeli. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification
Yoon Kim. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit
Christopher D. Manning, Mihai Surdeanu, John Bauer, Jenny Finkel, Steven J. Bethard, and David McClosky. 2014 · 2014
The global burden of journal peer review in the biomedical literature: Strong imbalance in the collective enterprise
Michail Kovanis, Raphaël Porcher, Philippe Ravaud, and Ludovic Trinquart. 2016 · 2016
Later among the works it cites.
Is this post persuasive? ranking argumentative comments in online forum
Zhongyu Wei, Yang Liu, and Yi Li. 2016 · 2016
Later among the works it cites.
Argumentation mining in user-generated web discourse
Ivan Habernal and Iryna Gurevych. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Understanding and detecting supporting arguments of diverse types
Xinyu Hua and Lu Wang. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Argument mining with structured svms and rnns
Vlad Niculae, Joonsuk Park, and Claire Cardie. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Computational support for academic peer review: A perspective from artificial intelligence
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Cited alongside, same era.
Identifying appropriate support for propositions in online user comments
Joonsuk Park and Claire Cardie. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Glove: Global vectors for word representation
Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Toward machine-assisted participation in erulemaking: An argumentation model of evaluability
Joonsuk Park, Cheryl Blake, and Claire Cardie. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
Modeling argument strength in student essays
Isaac Persing and Vincent Ng. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
Coordinate descent algorithms
Stephen J Wright. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
A news editorial corpus for mining argumentation strategies
Khalid Al Khatib, Henning Wachsmuth, Johannes Kiesel, Matthias Hagen, and Benno Stein. 2016 · 2016
Cited alongside, same era.
Simon Price and Peter A Flach. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Reporting score distributions makes a difference: Performance study of lstm-networks for sequence tagging
Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Parsing argumentation structures in persuasive essays
Christian Stab and Iryna Gurevych. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Argumentation quality assessment: Theory vs. practice
Henning Wachsmuth, Nona Naderi, Ivan Habernal, Yufang Hou, Graeme Hirst, Iryna Gurevych, and Benno Stein. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Winning on the merits: The joint effects of content and style on debate outcomes
Lu Wang, Nick Beauchamp, Sarah Shugars, and Kechen Qin. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
A dataset of peer reviews (peerread): Collection, insights and nlp applications
Dongyeop Kang, Waleed Ammar, Bhavana Dalvi, Madeleine van Zuylen, Sebastian Kohlmeier, Eduard Hovy, and Roy Schwartz. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
A corpus of erulemaking user comments for measuring evaluability of arguments
Joonsuk Park and Claire Cardie. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Deep contextualized word representations
Matthew Peters, Mark Neumann, Mohit Iyyer, Matt Gardner, Christopher Clark, Kenton Lee, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Multi-task learning for argumentation mining in low-resource settings
Claudia Schulz, Steffen Eger, Johannes Daxenberger, Tobias Kahse, and Iryna Gurevych. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Model selection and estimation in regression with grouped variables
Ming Yuan and Yi Lin. 2006 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.