Estimating mutual information from i.i.d. samples drawn from an unknown joint density function is a basic statistical problem of broad interest with multitudinous applications. The most popular estimator is one proposed by Kraskov and St "ogbauer and Grassberger (KSG) in 2004, and is nonparametric and based on the distances of each sample to its @math nearest neighboring sample, where @math is a fixed small integer. Despite its widespread use (part of scientific software packages), theoretical properties of this estimator have been largely unexplored. In this paper we demonstrate that the estimator is consistent and also identify an upper bound on the rate of convergence of the bias as a function of number of samples. We argue that the superior performance benefits of the KSG estimator stems from a curious "correlation boosting" effect and build on this intuition to modify the KSG estimator in novel ways to construct a superior estimator. As a byproduct of our investigations, we obtain nearly tight rates of convergence of the @math error of the well known fixed @math nearest neighbor estimator of differential entropy by Kozachenko and Leonenko.
The basic estimation question studied in this paper takes a different hue depending on whether the underlying distribution is discrete or continuous. In the discrete setting, significant understanding of the minimax rate-optimal estimation of functionals, including entropy and mutual information, of an unknown probability mass function is attained via recent works @cite_5 @cite_48 @cite_39 @cite_45 @cite_13 . The continuous setting is significantly different, bringing to fore the interplay of geometry of the Euclidean space as well as the role of dimensionality of the domain in terms of estimating the information theoretic quantities; this setting is the focus of this paper. This fundamental question has been of longstanding interest in the theoretical statistics community where it is a canonical question of estimating a functional of the (unknown) density @cite_8 but also in the machine learning @cite_15 @cite_10 , information theory @cite_36 @cite_5 @cite_13 @cite_52 , and theoretical computer science @cite_39 @cite_43 @cite_7 communities. The popularity of mutual information and other information theoretic quantities comes from their wide use as basic features in several downstream applications @cite_28 @cite_9 @cite_4 @cite_57 .
@cite_4 @cite_7 @cite_8 @cite_36 @cite_48 @cite_10 @cite_28 @cite_9 @cite_52 @cite_39 @cite_57 @cite_43 @cite_45 @cite_5 @cite_15 @cite_13
2004537679 2205170224 2034177275 2150879893 2114771311 2149350210 2149454242 2149772057 2149268774 2127090196 2155328222 2134169350 1989151402 2000163531 2142357860 2203041117
A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60]