Semantic Publishing Challenge – Assessing the Quality of Scientific Output

  • Christoph LangeEmail author
  • Angelo Di Iorio
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 475)


Linked Open Datasets about scholarly publications enable the development and integration of sophisticated end-user services; however, richer datasets are still needed. The first goal of this Challenge was to investigate novel approaches to obtain such semantic data. In particular, we were seeking methods and tools to extract information from scholarly publications, to publish it as LOD, and to use queries over this LOD to assess quality. This year we focused on the quality of workshop proceedings, and of journal articles w.r.t. their citation network. A third, open task, asked to showcase how such semantic data could be exploited and how Semantic Web technologies could help in this emerging context.


Proceeding Volume Workshop Proceeding Scholarly Publishing Evaluation Dataset Extraction Task 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We would like to thank our reviewers, judges and sponsors, whose names are mentioned in the preface of this overall proceedings volume, as well as our participants for their hard work, creative solutions and useful suggestions. We would also like to thank Silvio Peroni for his suggestions on the overall challenge structure and, in particular, on the definition of task 2.


  1. 1.
    \(3^{\rm {th}}\) Workshop on Linked Science (LISC). CEUR-WS 1116 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    \(4^{\rm {th}}\) Workshop on Semantic Publishing (SePublica). CEUR-WS 1155 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atanassova, I., Bertin, M.: Semantic facets for scientific information retrieval. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 108–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertin, M., Atanassova, I.: Hybrid approach for the semantic processing of scientific papers. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2014). CCIS, vol. 457, Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bryl, V., et al.: What’s in the proceedings? Combining publisher’s and researcher’s perspectives. In: \(4^{\rm {th}}\) SePublica Workshop. CEUR-WS 1155 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ciancarini, P., Di Iorio, A., Nuzzolese, A.G., Peroni, S., Vitali, F.: Evaluating citation functions in CiTO: cognitive issues. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 580–594. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Di Iorio, A., Nuzzolese, A.G., Peroni, S.: Identifying functions of citations with CiTalO. In: Cimiano, P., Fernández, M., Lopez, V., Schlobach, S., Völker, J. (eds.) ESWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7955, pp. 231–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Di Noia, T., Cantador, I., Ostuni, V.C.: Linked open data-enabled recommender systems: ESWC 2014 challenge on book recommendation. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 129–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dimou, A., et al.: Extraction and semantic annotation of workshop proceedings in HTML using RML. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 114–119. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elsevier, ed. Executable Paper Grand Challenge. Knowledge enhancement in the computational sciences (2011).
  11. 11.
    Elsevier, ed. The Elsevier Grand Challenge. Knowledge enhancement in the life sciences (2009).
  12. 12.
    Hirsch, J.E.: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS 102(46), 6569–16572 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoekstra, R., Groth, P., Charlaganov, M.: Linkitup: semantic publishing of research data. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 95–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jentzsch, A., Cyganiak, R., Bizer, C.: State of the LOD Cloud (2011). (visited on 2014–08-06)
  15. 15.
    Kolchin, M., Kozlov, F.: A template-based information extraction from web sites with unstable markup. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 89–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Osborne, F., Motta, E.: Understanding research dynamics. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 101–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Palma, R., et al.: ROHub – a digital library of research objects supporting scientists towards reproducible science. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 77–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Priem, J., et al.: altmetrics: a manifesto (2011). (visited on 2014–08-06)
  19. 19.
    Recupero, D.R., Cambria, E.: ESWC 14 challenge on concept-level sentiment analysis. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 3–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ronzano, F., Del Bosque, G.C, Saggion, H.: Semantify CEUR-WS proceedings: towards the automatic generation of highly descriptive scholarly publishing linked datasets. In: Presutti, V., et al. (eds.) SemWebEval 2014. CCIS, vol. 457, pp. 83–88. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., Tidhar, D.: Automatic classification of citation function. In: Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, ACL (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    The DBLP Computer Science Bibliography.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Bonn and Fraunhofer IAISBonnGermany
  2. 2.Università di BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations