Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2023
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2023
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2023
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

GROBID end-to-end benchmarking datasets

Authors: GROBID contributors;

GROBID end-to-end benchmarking datasets

Abstract

Here are the datasets used for GROBID end-to-end benchmarking covering: - metadata extraction, - bibliographical reference extraction, parsing and citation context identification, and - full text body structuring. The following collections are included: - a PubMedCentral gold-standard dataset called PMC_sample_1943, compiled by Alexandru Constantin. The dataset, around 1.5GB in size, contains 1943 articles from 1943 different journals corresponding to the publications from a 2011 snapshot. For each article, we have a PDF file and a NLM XML file. - a bioRxiv dataset called biorxiv-10k-test-2000 of 2000 preprint articles originally compiled with care and published by Daniel Ecer, available on Zenodo. The dataset contains for each article a PDF file and the corresponding reference NLM file (manually created by bioRxiv). The NLM files have been further systematically reviewed and annotated with additional markup corresponding to data and code availability statements and funding statements by the Grobid team. Around 5.4G in size. - a set of 1000 PLOS articles, called PLOS_1000, randomly selected from the full PLOS Open Access collection. Again, for each article, the published PDF is available with the corresponding publisher JATS XML file, around 1.3GB total size. - a set of 984 articles from eLife, called eLife_984, randomly selected from their open collection available on GitHub. Every articles come with the published PDF, the publisher JATS XML file and the eLife public HTML file (as bonus, not used), all in their latest version, around 4.5G total. For each of these datasets, the directory structure is the same and documented here. Further information on Grobid benchmarking and how to run it: https://grobid.readthedocs.io/en/latest/End-to-end-evaluation/. Latest benchmarking scores are also available in the Grobid documentation: https://grobid.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Benchmarking/ These resources are originally published under CC-BY license. Our additional annotations are similarly under CC-BY. We thank NIH, bioRxiv, PLOS and eLife for making these resources Open Access and reusable.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 117
    download downloads 50
  • 117
    views
    50
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
117
50