Search results

Author affiliations provide key information when attributing academic performance like publication counts. So far, such measures have been aggregated either manually or only to top-level institutions, such as universities. Supervised affiliation resolution requires a large number of annotated alignments between affiliation strings and known institutions, which are not readily available. We introduce the task of unsupervised hierarchical affiliation resolution, which assigns affiliations to institutions on all hierarchy levels (e.g. departments), discovering the institutions as well as their hierarchical ordering on the fly. From the corresponding requirements, we derive a simple conceptual framework based on the subset partial order that can be extended to account for the discrepancies evident in realistic affiliations from the Web of Science. We implement initial baselines and provide datasets and evaluation metrics for experimentation. Results show that mapping affiliations to known institutions and discovering lower-level institutions works well with simple baselines, whereas unsupervised top-level- and hierarchical resolution is more challenging. Our work provides structured guidance for further in-depth studies and improved methodology by identifying and discussing a number of observed difficulties and important challenges that future work needs to address.

In this work, we address the problem of blocking in the context of author name disambiguation. We describe a framework that formalizes different ways of name-matching to determine which names could potentially refer to the same author. We focus on name variations that follow from specifying a name with different completeness (i.e. full first name or only initial). We extend this framework by a simple way to define traditional, new and custom blocking schemes. Then, we evaluate different old and new schemes in the Web of Science. In this context we define and compare a new type of blocking schemes. Based on these results, we discuss the question whether name-matching can be used in blocking evaluation as a replacement of annotated author identifiers. Finally, we argue that blocking can have a strong impact on the application and evaluation of author disambiguation.