Paper detail

Causal Knowledge Extraction from Scholarly Papers in Social Sciences

The scale and scope of scholarly articles today are overwhelming human researchers who seek to timely digest and synthesize knowledge. In this paper, we seek to develop natural language processing (NLP) models to accelerate the speed of extraction of relationships from scholarly papers in social sciences, identify hypotheses from these papers, and extract the cause-and-effect entities. Specifically, we develop models to 1) classify sentences in scholarly documents in business and management as hypotheses (hypothesis classification), 2) classify these hypotheses as causal relationships or not (causality classification), and, if they are causal, 3) extract the cause and effect entities from these hypotheses (entity extraction). We have achieved high performance for all the three tasks using different modeling techniques. Our approach may be generalizable to scholarly documents in a wide range of social sciences, as well as other types of textual materials.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.