PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology· 2026Q1

From citation intent to knowledge contribution: Classifying what cited papers actually contribute

Zhibang Quan, Zhentao Liang, Ming Ma, Jinyu Wei et al.

Short summary

A new Knowledge Contribution Taxonomy (KCT) classifies cited papers into Method, Resource Tool, Empirical Finding, and Background, distinguishing core vs. non-core contributions, and achieves 85.5% accuracy with a Dual-Path Fusion model, outperforming LLMs.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Introduces the Knowledge Contribution Taxonomy (KCT) to classify cited papers by their knowledge type (Method, Resource Tool, Empirical Finding, Background) and core vs. non-core contribution.
  • A Dual-Path Fusion model achieved 85.5% accuracy in KCT classification, outperforming mainstream large language models.
  • Analysis of 802,202 citations reveals core knowledge contributions constitute only 39.09% of all citations.
  • Core knowledge contribution counts show higher hit rates for award-winning papers compared to traditional citation counts across all ranking cutoffs.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Abstract Understanding the flow and evolution of scientific knowledge is essential for assessing research impact. Existing citation analysis methods mainly focus on citing authors' subjective intents, failing to consistently characterize cited papers' knowledge contributions. This study proposes the Knowledge Contribution Taxonomy (KCT), derived from the Scientific Research Logic Model, which identifies the type of knowledge a cited paper contributes based on the citation context. KCT classifies citations into Method, Resource Tool, Empirical Finding, and Background, further distinguishing core from non‐core contributions. We propose a Dual‐Path Fusion model for the classification task, which achieves an accuracy of 85.5%, outperforming mainstream large language models. An analysis of 802,202 citations from the ACL Anthology reveals that core knowledge contributions account for only 39.09% of all citations. The core knowledge contribution citation count achieves higher hit rates for award‐winning papers than the traditional citation count at all ranking cutoffs, reflecting the value of differentiating knowledge contributions for research evaluation and impact prediction. In dissemination prediction experiments, KCT outperforms citation intent classification, demonstrating its stronger predictive validity for scholarly dissemination. By focusing on the knowledge contributions of cited papers, the KCT can support differentiated research evaluation.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Statistics, Probability and UncertaintyDecision Sciences