Exploring Academic Influence of Algorithms by Co-occurrence Network Based on Full-text of Academic Papers
Authors: Yuzhuo Wang, Chengzhi Zhang, Min Song, Seong Deok Kim, Youngsoo Ko, Juhee Lee
Organizations: Department of Management Science and Engineering, Anhui University, Hefei, 230601, China · Department of Information Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210094, China · Department of Information Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, 03722, Korea
Algorithms have become central to scientific research in the era of artificial intelligence (AI). Although algorithm mentions in papers are often used to indicate popularity and influence, existing studies usually evaluate individual algorithms in isolation and pay limited attention to the collective influence formed through their interconnections. This study constructs large-scale algorithm co-occurrence networks in natural language processing (NLP) based on the full text of academic papers and investigates algorithm influence from a network perspective. Using deep learning models, we extract algorithm entities and build overall, cumulative, and annual co-occurrence networks. We analyze their structural characteristics and apply multiple centrality measures to assess the group influence of algorithms across the whole field and over time. The results show that algorithm networks display typical features of complex networks, with increasingly dense connections developing over approximately two decades. Classic, high-performing algorithms and those located at the intersections of different research periods tend to have high popularity, control, centrality, and balanced influence. When the influence of an algorithm declines, it usually loses its core network position first, followed by weaker associations with other algorithms. This study is the first large-scale analysis of algorithm co-occurrence networks. Covering more than four decades of academic publications, it provides a temporal and structural view of algorithm influence and offers a foundation for future research on networks linking algorithms, scholars, and tasks.
With the rise of data-intensive science, algorithms have become central to scientific research. In academic papers, algorithms are mentioned for different purposes, such as describing, using, comparing, or improving methods for specific research tasks. Identifying these purposes can reveal relationships among algorithms and help assess their roles and value. Taking natural language processing (NLP) as an example, this study proposes a sentence-level framework for identifying, analyzing, and tracing the evolution of motivations for mentioning algorithms. We first identify algorithm entities and algorithm-related sentences from full-text papers through manual annotation and machine learning. We then classify mention motivations using pretrained models and data augmentation, and analyze their distribution and temporal evolution. The results show that deep learning models trained with augmented data outperform traditional machine learning models in motivation classification. In NLP papers, more than half of algorithm-related sentences express direct use, whereas improvement is the least frequent motivation. The diversity of motivations has increased over time. For specific algorithm categories, grammar-based algorithms are more often mentioned for description, while machine learning algorithms are more often mentioned for use. Over time, use motivations have gradually replaced description motivations across different algorithms, and the number of motivation types associated with individual algorithms has declined significantly. This study reveals how authors mention algorithm entities in academic writing and provides a basis for future research on algorithm relationship identification and algorithm impact evaluation.
With the rapid pace of AI research and the hundreds of daily new publications, staying up-to-date with the latest developments has become increasingly difficult. For researchers, quickly identifying impactful work is essential, yet manually reviewing each new publication is impractical. Automated impact prediction methods help address this challenge, usually by combining various information sources available, such as a paper's content or citation history. In this work, we propose using GitHub engagement as an additional source and demonstrate that it provides both a timely and accurate signal. To this end, we introduce GitScholar, a novel dataset that links GitHub activity from 444,000 repositories to over 558,000 AI arXiv papers. Our experiments show that GitHub reactions improve early prediction precision by up to 12% over a strong academic baseline. Additionally, we find that GitHub signal offers near-complete coverage of high-impact AI papers, and consistently correlates with future academic success. GitScholar is publicly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/huawei-csl/GitScholar.
Emilien Guandalino, Lorenz K. Müller, Beatrice Alessandra Motetti +2
With the rapid growth of the number of academic papers, systematically evaluating the difficulty of research and its relationship to academic impact offers important significance for research topic selection and resource allocation. However, current studies lack quantitative assessments of research difficulty and its correlation with academic impact. This paper proposes a comprehensive evaluation system for research difficulty, incorporating factors such as academic collaboration, content, and references. Taking the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) as a case study, we extract both internal and external features from academic papers, compute multiple research difficulty indicators. We assign their weights using the entropy weight method and perform a weighted sum to obtain the research difficulty score of academic papers. This paper uses the citation frequency of academic papers to measure academic impact. To validate our approach, NLP experts assessed the difficulty of a sample of papers, and correlation analyses confirmed the reliability of our measurement. Empirical results reveal that in NLP, factors such as the number of pages, reference count, and participation of high-level institutions are significantly associated with academic impact. Moreover, we identify an inverted U-shaped relationship between research difficulty and academic impact. It suggests that moderately difficult research tends to achieve greater academic impact.