论文标题
NLP研究中的地理引文差距
Geographic Citation Gaps in NLP Research
论文作者
论文摘要
在一个公平的世界中,人们有公平的教育机会,进行科学研究,出版和获得工作的信誉,无论他们的住所如何。但是,在研究人员中,众所周知,在NLP顶级地点接受的大量论文来自少数西方国家和(最近)中国。鉴于,很少有来自非洲和南美的论文发表。纸引用数量也被认为存在类似的差异。本着“我们无法衡量的东西,我们无法改善”的精神,这项工作提出了一系列有关地理位置和出版成功之间关系的问题(在顶级NLP场地接受和引文影响)。我们首先从ACL选集创建了一个70,000篇论文的数据集,提取了其元信息,并生成了引用网络。然后,我们证明,不仅在纸张接受和引用中存在实质性的地理差异,而且即使控制许多变量,例如出版物和NLP的子场,这些差异仍然存在。此外,尽管NLP社区采取了一些步骤来改善地理多样性,但我们表明,自2000年代初以来,各个地方的出版指标的差异仍处于越来越大的趋势。我们在此处发布代码和数据集:https://github.com/iamjanvijay/acl-cite-net
In a fair world, people have equitable opportunities to education, to conduct scientific research, to publish, and to get credit for their work, regardless of where they live. However, it is common knowledge among researchers that a vast number of papers accepted at top NLP venues come from a handful of western countries and (lately) China; whereas, very few papers from Africa and South America get published. Similar disparities are also believed to exist for paper citation counts. In the spirit of "what we do not measure, we cannot improve", this work asks a series of questions on the relationship between geographical location and publication success (acceptance in top NLP venues and citation impact). We first created a dataset of 70,000 papers from the ACL Anthology, extracted their meta-information, and generated their citation network. We then show that not only are there substantial geographical disparities in paper acceptance and citation but also that these disparities persist even when controlling for a number of variables such as venue of publication and sub-field of NLP. Further, despite some steps taken by the NLP community to improve geographical diversity, we show that the disparity in publication metrics across locations is still on an increasing trend since the early 2000s. We release our code and dataset here: https://github.com/iamjanvijay/acl-cite-net