Papers › ImpactCite: An XLNet-based method for Citation Impact Analysis
ImpactCite: An XLNet-based method for Citation Impact Analysis
Dominique Mercier, Syed Tahseen Raza Rizvi, Vikas Rajashekar, Andreas Dengel, Sheraz Ahmed
Citations play a vital role in understanding the impact of scientific literature. Generally, citations are analyzed quantitatively whereas qualitative analysis of citations can reveal deeper insights into the impact of a scientific artifact in the community. Therefore, citation impact analysis (which includes sentiment and intent classification) enables us to quantify the quality of the citations which can eventually assist us in the estimation of ranking and impact. The contribution of this paper is two-fold. First, we benchmark the well-known language models like BERT and ALBERT along with several popular networks for both tasks of sentiment and intent classification. Second, we provide ImpactCite, which is XLNet-based method for citation impact analysis. All evaluations are performed on a set of publicly available citation analysis datasets. Evaluation results reveal that ImpactCite achieves a new state-of-the-art performance for both citation intent and sentiment classification by outperforming the existing approaches by 3.44% and 1.33% in F1-score. Therefore, we emphasize ImpactCite (XLNet-based solution) for both tasks to better understand the impact of a citation. Additional efforts have been performed to come up with CSC-Clean corpus, which is a clean and reliable dataset for citation sentiment classification.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citation Intent Classification | SciCite | ImpactCite | Macro-F1 | 88.93 | #2 of 8 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections