Research Paper Quality Recognition Through Textual Feature Analysis

Abstract:Knowledge and innovations are shaped by using the quality and credibility of the scientific research. Yet, distinguishing between impactful, high-quality work and flawed studies remains a challenge. This paper introduces a benchmark for classifying research papers into two categories: good (highly cited) and non-good (retracted), using only textual features from titles and abstracts. We evaluate multiple embedding techniques, including SBERT, Word2Vec, FastText, USE, and TF-IDF, combined with classifiers such as Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forests, and Neural Networks. Our contributions include: (1) hyperparameter transparency, (2) feature space visualizations using t-SNE, (3) model interpretability analysis with SHAP, and (4) detailed examination of error cases. Experimental results show that a neural network with SBERT embeddings achieves 87.22\% accuracy, while FastText combined with SVM reaches 91.12\%. These findings highlight the value of textual information in assessing research quality, with ethical considerations for deployment. This work contributes toward the development of academic integrity tools that promote trustworthy scholarship.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2608.20368 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2608.20368v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.20368 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.