The paper introduces an end‑to‑end pipeline that harvests, validates, and models links between scholarly articles and their source code from journals such as JOSS, SoftwareX, and IPOL, as well as SIGMOD ARI reproducibility reports. It produces a curated set of 4,397 DOI‑repository pairs and defines two Wikidata‑based application profiles—one for articles and one for software—aligned with schema.org and CodeMeta. Using these profiles, the authors created 4,182 new Wikidata software items linked to their papers, while only 82 repositories were previously represented, and they demonstrate compatibility with the COAR Notify protocol for future live enrichment.
By Camillo Carlo Pellizzari di San Girolamo, Francesco Tosoni
The paper evaluates browser-based large language models (LLMs) for extracting detailed, contextualized data from scientific papers. It presents four workflows: (1) expert-curated prompts yield good extraction but struggle with nuance; (2) LLMs can generate effective prompts from simple instructions; (3) autonomous literature discovery is challenging, with missing or hallucinated references; (4) LLMs can build new datasets from guidelines that align closely with human experts, yet still need human oversight. The study outlines a practical, auditable workflow where experts set standards, models cross-check extractions, and researchers resolve disputes, enabling scalable scientific data curation.
The paper investigates how large language models can extract contextualized data from scientific literature. It presents four workflows: expert‑written prompts, self‑generated prompts, autonomous literature discovery, and dataset creation from guidelines. While models perform well with prompts, they struggle with context, hallucinate references, and still need human oversight for final validation.
By Valentin Romanov, Monique Bax, Steven Niederer
Scientific research increasingly relies on large, heterogeneous data sources, motivating interest in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that provide natural language access to scientific kno...
arXiv:2609.16519v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Scientific research increasingly relies on large, heterogeneous data sources, motivating interest in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that...
By Bernie Boscoe, Srinath Saikrishnan, Vikram Seenivasan, Jack Stark, Andrew Lizarraga, Morgan Himes, Jonathan Soriano, PJ Allen, Tuan Do
arXiv:2608. 07254v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The increasing specialization of scientific research challenges existing classification systems, which provide effective representations of broad disciplines and research topics but often fail to capture the fine-grained conceptual structure of contemporary science.
By Daniele Raimondi, Feichi Lu, Oliver Grun, Mariia Eremina, Andrea Perlato
arXiv:2607. 25630v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interdisciplinary research is accelerating, yet scientific papers remain difficult to understand outside their home fields.
By Kyuri Im, Michael F\"arber
arXiv:2608. 09968v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current AI systems are optimized for answering questions; the scientific enterprise is bottlenecked earlier, at discovering the questions worth investigating.
By Hui Mao
arXiv:2607. 08539v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Leveraging large language models (LLMs) to analyze complex documents -- such as academic papers, technical manuals, and financial reports -- has emerged as a mainstream and critical task in both research and industry.
By Ziqi Chen, Yingli Zhou, Fangyuan Zhang, Quanqing Xu, Chuanhui Yang, Yixiang Fang
arXiv:2604. 22294v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Systematic reviews -- which requires comprehensive evidence collection and synthesis from large document corpora in response to targeted research questions -- are foundational in finance, social sciences, and other technical fields.
By Harshit Joshi, Priyank Shethia, Jadelynn Dao, Monica S. Lam
arXiv:2604. 03553v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI is increasingly supporting, accelerating, and automating scientific discovery across subjects.
By Lorenz Hufe, Niclas Griesshaber, Gavin Greif, Sebastian Oliver Eck, Philip Torr
arXiv:2606. 07454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Scientific paper recommendation is typically evaluated as static ranking over a fixed candidate set, yet real scientific reading unfolds as a daily, longitudinal process in which interests shift and feedback accumulates.
By Fuqiang Wang, Song Tan, Zheng Guo, Jiaohao Fu, Xinglong Xu, Bihui Yu, Jie Dong, Zheng Sun, Siyuan Li, Jingxuan Wei, Cheng Tan