cs.LGApr 27, 2026

CiteRadar: A Citation Intelligence Platform for Researcher Profiling and Geographic Visualization

Authors: Chenxu Niu, Yiming Sun

Organizations: NVIDIA Corporation · Texas Tech University

Read PDF
Ask AI
Cite

Copy citation

DOINot available for this paper

Abstract

Understanding the geographic reach and community structure of one's scholarly citations is increasingly valuable for career development, grant applications, and collaboration discovery -- yet accessible tools for answering these questions remain scarce. Existing bibliometric platforms either require costly institutional subscriptions or expose only aggregate citation counts without granular per-author metadata. We present CiteRadar, an open-source system that accepts a single Google Scholar user identifier and automatically produces a structured output folder containing: the author's complete publication list, all retrieved citing papers with enriched author metadata, two ranked author tables (by citation frequency and by h-index), a plain-text statistical summary, and a self-contained interactive HTML world map -- all from a single command-line invocation. CiteRadar integrates five heterogeneous data sources -- Google Scholar, OpenAlex, CrossRef, Semantic Scholar, and OpenStreetMap Nominatim -- through a carefully engineered five-stage pipeline. Key technical contributions include: (1) a Scholar meta-string parser resilient to Unicode non-breaking-space separators, a pervasive but undocumented quirk in Scholar's HTML that silently corrupts venue and year fields when unhandled; (2) a two-stage author disambiguation system using stop-word-filtered institution name similarity to guard against the well-known same-name entity-merging failure mode in bibliometric databases, demonstrated to eliminate h-index attribution errors of up to 9x the correct value; (3) an OpenAlex web-URL to API-URL conversion fix that raises the fraction of author records with city-level location data from 0% to ~60%; and (4) a logarithmically-scaled interactive Folium world map with per-city researcher popups, rendered as a fully self-contained HTML file.

Explore similar work

CardsList
May 28, 2026cs.AI

Rethinking Literature Search Evaluation: Deep Research Helps, and Human Citation Lists Are Not a Ground Truth

We study large-scale literature search from two complementary angles: improving the retrieval pipeline, and stress-testing the human reference list as an evaluation target. First, we implement a Deep Research pipeline that processes the full query paper and expands the retrieved results breadth-first along their bibliographies, and show that it substantially outperforms vanilla API-only search, raising recall on RollingEval-Jun25 (a 250-paper literature-search benchmark) from below 20% to above 80%. Second, we use a neutral LLM-as-a-judge to determine if human references are sound ground truth for the task. We find significant limitations: only 51% of human citations are judged moderately relevant or higher, against 86--88% for the strongest AI-based re-rankers. We study this gap on the OpenAlex co-authorship graph, finding that humans are 2.5x more likely than the best AI re-rankers to cite a direct collaborator. Together, our results argue against single-axis literature-search evaluation: recall, topical-relevance scoring, ranked-list diversity, and a co-authorship-distance diagnostic each measure complementary properties of citation quality and should be reported jointly.
Gaurav Sahu, Laurent Charlin, Christopher Pal
CitationsInformation Retrieval MetricsDeep ResearchRerankingAuthorshipGround Truth
AskPDF
Apr 26, 2026cs.DL

Beyond coauthorship: semantic structure and phantom collaborators in transportation research, 1967--2025

We present a semantic-structural atlas of transportation research built from 120{,}323 papers across 34 peer-reviewed journals published between 1967 and 2025, roughly an order of magnitude larger than and a decade beyond Sun and Rahwan's~(2017) coauthorship study. We use OpenAlex and Crossref as open, CC0-licensed data sources, resolve author identity through OpenAlex author IDs, ORCID records, and manual alias resolution, and embed every paper with SPECTER2 with Arora-style whitening concatenated with concept TF--IDF and venue linear-discriminant projections. On this substrate we report three findings. First, Leiden on the author-level semantic k-nearest-neighbor graph yields 23 topic communities that agree only weakly with the 172 coauthor communities (normalized mutual information 0.230.23), opening room for a predictive layer that neither source encodes alone. Second, a multiplex Leiden partition combining both edge types recovers 181 communities and localizes where collaboration and topic structure decouple. Third -- the paper's core methodological contribution -- we define \emph{phantom collaborators}, pairs of authors who are top-KK semantic neighbors yet ≥3\geq 3 hops apart in the coauthor graph, and show via a temporal hold-out (training cutoff 2019) that phantom pairs become real coauthors in 2020--2025 at a rate 1616 to 3333 times above random, popularity-weighted, and same-venue baselines, with a 6868-fold monotone gradient between the highest- and lowest-similarity buckets. All artifacts are released as a live, reproducible web atlas at https://choi-seongjin.github.io/transport-atlas/.
Seongjin Choi
AuthorshipCo-OccurrenceCollaborationNew EraAtlas
AskPDF
Jul 13, 2026cs.CL

ResearchQA: Benchmarking Citation-Grounded Question-Answering on Scientific Papers

Large language models are increasingly used to assist scientific reading, but existing evaluation methods often fail to detect whether answers are supported by verifiable citations. We introduce ResearchQA, a benchmark of 6,211 single-paper question-answer pairs from 494 open-access papers spanning eight domains and four question types: lookup, comprehension, multi-hop, and adversarial. ResearchQA is designed for citation-grounded evaluation: it permits multiple valid supporting passages for a claim and rewards grounded refusal when the source paper does not support an answer. We evaluate eight leading closed- and open-weight models in a citation-grounded chat-with-paper setting using a deterministic citation matcher and an LLM-based rubric evaluator. Citation-based metrics separate systems more clearly than LLM-evaluator scores: section coverage and citation accuracy vary substantially across models, while evaluator scores remain tightly compressed. We further find that open-weight models approach the best closed-model citation accuracy while achieving 3 to 6 times lower per-example latency. We release the benchmark, evaluation harness, and evaluator prompt.
Saba Imran, Debanjum Singh Solanky
CitationsQuestion-Answer PairsHuman Grounded Evaluation
AskPDF