Abstract
Most work on scholarly document processing assumes that the information processed is trust-worthy and factually correct. However, this is not always the case. There are two core challenges, which should be addressed: 1) ensuring that scientific publications are credible – e.g. that claims are not made without supporting evidence, and that all relevant supporting evidence is provided; and 2) that scientific findings are not misrepresented, distorted or outright misreported when communicated by journalists or the general public. I will present some first steps towards addressing these problems and outline remaining challenges.- Anthology ID:
- 2021.sdp-1.1
- Volume:
- Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing
- Month:
- June
- Year:
- 2021
- Address:
- Online
- Venue:
- sdp
- SIG:
- Publisher:
- Association for Computational Linguistics
- Note:
- Pages:
- 1–6
- Language:
- URL:
- https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1
- DOI:
- 10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1
- Cite (ACL):
- Isabelle Augenstein. 2021. Determining the Credibility of Science Communication. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing, pages 1–6, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Cite (Informal):
- Determining the Credibility of Science Communication (Augenstein, sdp 2021)
- PDF:
- https://preview.aclanthology.org/auto-file-uploads/2021.sdp-1.1.pdf