Researcher profile

Martin Klein

Martin Klein contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Combining keyphrase extraction and lexical diversity to characterize ideas in publication titles

Beyond bibliometrics, there is interest in characterizing the evolution of the number of ideas in scientific papers. A common approach for investigating this involves analyzing the titles of publications to detect vocabulary changes over time. With the notion that phrases, or more specifically keyphrases, represent concepts, lexical diversity metrics are applied to phrased versions of the titles. Thus changes in lexical diversity are treated as indicators of shifts, and possibly expansion, of research. Therefore, optimizing detection of keyphrases is an important aspect of this process. Rather than just one, we propose to use multiple phrase detection models with the goal to produce a more comprehensive set of keyphrases from the source corpora. Another potential advantage to this approach is that the union and difference of these sets may provide automated techniques for identifying and omitting non-specific phrases. We compare the performance of several phrase detection models, analyze the keyphrase sets output of each, and calculate lexical diversity of corpora variants incorporating keyphrases from each model, using four common lexical diversity metrics.

preprint2022arXiv

The Rise of GitHub in Scholarly Publications

The definition of scholarly content has expanded to include the data and source code that contribute to a publication. While major archiving efforts to preserve conventional scholarly content, typically in PDFs (e.g., LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico), are underway, no analogous effort has yet emerged to preserve the data and code referenced in those PDFs, particularly the scholarly code hosted online on Git Hosting Platforms (GHPs). Similarly, the Software Heritage Foundation is working to archive public source code, but there is value in archiving the issue threads, pull requests, and wikis that provide important context to the code while maintaining their original URLs. In current implementations, source code and its ephemera are not preserved, which presents a problem for scholarly projects where reproducibility matters. To understand and quantify the scope of this issue, we analyzed the use of GHP URIs in the arXiv and PMC corpora from January 2007 to December 2021. In total, there were 253,590 URIs to GitHub, SourceForge, Bitbucket, and GitLab repositories across the 2.66 million publications in the corpora. We found that GitHub, GitLab, SourceForge, and Bitbucket were collectively linked to 160 times in 2007 and 76,746 times in 2021. In 2021, one out of five publications in the arXiv corpus included a URI to GitHub. The complexity of GHPs like GitHub is not amenable to conventional Web archiving techniques. Therefore, the growing use of GHPs in scholarly publications points to an urgent and growing need for dedicated efforts to archive their holdings in order to preserve research code and its scholarly ephemera.

preprint2021arXiv

Automatically Selecting Striking Images for Social Cards

To allow previewing a web page, social media platforms have developed social cards: visualizations consisting of vital information about the underlying resource. At a minimum, social cards often include features such as the web resource's title, text summary, striking image, and domain name. News and scholarly articles on the web are frequently subject to social card creation when being shared on social media. However, we noticed that not all web resources offer sufficient metadata elements to enable appealing social cards. For example, the COVID-19 emergency has made it clear that scholarly articles, in particular, are at an aesthetic disadvantage in social media platforms when compared to their often more flashy disinformation rivals. Also, social cards are often not generated correctly for archived web resources, including pages that lack or predate standards for specifying striking images. With these observations, we are motivated to quantify the levels of inclusion of required metadata in web resources, its evolution over time for archived resources, and create and evaluate an algorithm to automatically select a striking image for social cards. We find that more than 40% of archived news articles sampled from the NEWSROOM dataset and 22% of scholarly articles sampled from the PubMed Central dataset fail to supply striking images. We demonstrate that we can automatically predict the striking image with a Precision@1 of 0.83 for news articles from NEWSROOM and 0.78 for scholarly articles from the open access journal PLOS ONE.

preprint2021arXiv

It's All About The Cards: Sharing on Social Media Probably Encouraged HTML Metadata Growth

In a perfect world, all articles consistently contain sufficient metadata to describe the resource. We know this is not the reality, so we are motivated to investigate the evolution of the metadata that is present when authors and publishers supply their own. Because applying metadata takes time, we recognize that each news article author has a limited metadata budget with which to spend their time and effort. How are they spending this budget? What are the top metadata categories in use? How did they grow over time? What purpose do they serve? We also recognize that not all metadata fields are used equally. What is the growth of individual fields over time? Which fields experienced the fastest adoption? In this paper, we review 227,726 HTML news articles from 29 outlets captured by the Internet Archive between 1998 and 2016. Upon reviewing the metadata fields in each article, we discovered that 2010 began a metadata renaissance as publishers embraced metadata for improved search engine ranking, search engine tracking, social media tracking, and social media sharing. When analyzing individual fields, we find that one application of metadata stands out above all others: social cards -- the cards generated by platforms like Twitter when one shares a URL. Once a metadata standard was established for cards in 2010, its fields were adopted by 20% of articles in the first year and reached more than 95% adoption by 2016. This rate of adoption surpasses efforts like Schema.org and Dublin Core by a fair margin. When confronted with these results on how news publishers spend their metadata budget, we must conclude that it is all about the cards.

preprint2020arXiv

On the Persistence of Persistent Identifiers of the Scholarly Web

Scholarly resources, just like any other resources on the web, are subject to reference rot as they frequently disappear or significantly change over time. Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are commonplace to persistently identify scholarly resources and have become the de facto standard for citing them. We investigate the notion of persistence of DOIs by analyzing their resolution on the web. We derive confidence in the persistence of these identifiers in part from the assumption that dereferencing a DOI will consistently return the same response, regardless of which HTTP request method we use or from which network environment we send the requests. Our experiments show, however, that persistence, according to our interpretation, is not warranted. We find that scholarly content providers respond differently to varying request methods and network environments and even change their response to requests against the same DOI. In this paper we present the results of our quantitative analysis that is aimed at informing the scholarly communication community about this disconcerting lack of consistency.