Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the utility of "highlights" sections in academic papers for unsupervised keyword extraction, finding that they contain complementary information to abstracts. They evaluated three input scenarios: abstract only, highlights only, and combined abstract and highlights, using four unsupervised models on CS and LIS datasets. Results show that combining abstracts and highlights significantly improves keyword extraction performance compared to using either alone.
Academic paper "highlights" sections are a surprisingly rich source of keywords, boosting unsupervised extraction when combined with abstracts.
Automatic keyword extraction from academic papers is a key area of interest in natural language processing and information retrieval. Although previous research has mainly focused on utilizing abstract and references for keyword extraction, this paper focuses on the highlights section - a summary describing the key findings and contributions, offering readers a quick overview of the research. Our observations indicate that highlights contain valuable keyword information that can effectively complement the abstract. To investigate the impact of incorporating highlights into unsupervised keyword extraction, we evaluate three input scenarios: using only the abstract, the highlights, and a combination of both. Experiments conducted with four unsupervised models on Computer Science (CS), Library and Information Science (LIS) datasets reveal that integrating the abstract with highlights significantly improves extraction performance. Furthermore, we examine the differences in keyword coverage and content between abstract and highlights, exploring how these variations influence extraction outcomes. The data and code are available at https://github.com/xiangyi-njust/Highlight-KPE.
