Scholarly documents have a great degree of variation, both in terms of content (semantics) and structure (pragmatics). Prior work in scholarly document understanding emphasizes semantics through document summarization and corpus topic modeling but tends to omit pragmatics such as document organization and flow. Using a corpus of scholarly documents across 19 disciplines and state-of-the-art language modeling techniques, we learn a fixed set of domain-agnostic descriptors for document sections and “retrofit” the corpus to these descriptors (also referred to as “normalization”). Then, we analyze the position and ordering of these descriptors across documents to understand the relationship between discipline and structure. We report within-discipline structural archetypes, variability, and between-discipline comparisons, supporting the hypothesis that scholarly communities, despite their size, diversity, and breadth, share similar avenues for expressing their work. Our findings lay the foundation for future work in assessing research quality, domain style transfer, and further pragmatic analysis.

Conversational agents, having the goal of natural language generation, must rely on language models which can integrate emotion into their responses. Recent projects outline models which can produce emotional sentences, but unlike human language, they tend to be restricted to one affective category out of a few. To my knowledge, none allow for the intentional coexistence of multiple emotions on the word or sentence level. Building on prior research which allows for variation in the intensity of a singular emotion, this research proposal outlines an LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) language model which allows for variation in multiple emotions simultaneously.