In this paper, we present our work developed for the scientific web discourse detection task (Task 4a) of CheckThat! 2025. We propose a novel council debate method that simulates structured academic discussions among multiple large language models (LLMs) to identify whether a given tweet contains (i) a scientific claim, (ii) a reference to a scientific study, or (iii) mentions of scientific entities. We explore three debating methods: i) single debate, where two LLMs argue for opposing positions while a third acts as a judge; ii) team debate, in which multiple models collaborate within each side of the debate; and iii) council debate, where multiple expert models deliberate together to reach a consensus, moderated by a chairperson model. We choose council debate as our primary model as it outperforms others in the development test set. Although our proposed method did not rank highly for identifying scientific claims (8th out of 10) or mentions of scientific entities (9th out of 10), it ranked first in detecting references to scientific studies.

In this paper, we, as the DS@GT team for CLEF 2025 CheckThat! Task 4a Scientific Web Discourse Detection, present the methods we explored for this task. For this multiclass classification task, we determined if a tweet contained a scientific claim, a reference to a scientific study or publication, and/or mentions of scientific entities, such as a university or a scientist. We present 3 modeling approaches for this task: transformer finetuning, few-shot prompting of LLMs, and a combined ensemble model whose design was informed by earlier experiments. Our team placed 7th in the competition, achieving a macro-averaged F1 score of 0.8611, an improvement over the DeBERTaV3 baseline of 0.8375. Our code is available on Github at https://github.com/dsgt-arc/checkthat-2025-swd/tree/main/subtask-4a.

We present SciDMT, an enhanced and expanded corpus for scientific mention detection, offering a significant advancement over existing related resources. SciDMT contains annotated scientific documents for datasets (D), methods (M), and tasks (T). The corpus consists of two components: 1) the SciDMT main corpus, which includes 48 thousand scientific articles with over 1.8 million weakly annotated mention annotations in the format of in-text span, and 2) an evaluation set, which comprises 100 scientific articles manually annotated for evaluation purposes. To the best of our knowledge, SciDMT is the largest corpus for scientific entity mention detection. The corpus's scale and diversity are instrumental in developing and refining models for tasks such as indexing scientific papers, enhancing information retrieval, and improving the accessibility of scientific knowledge. We demonstrate the corpus's utility through experiments with advanced deep learning architectures like SciBERT and GPT-3.5. Our findings establish performance baselines and highlight unresolved challenges in scientific mention detection. SciDMT serves as a robust benchmark for the research community, encouraging the development of innovative models to further the field of scientific information extraction.

Proper citation is of great importance in academic writing for it enables knowledge accumulation and maintains academic integrity. However, citing properly is not an easy task. For published scientific entities, the ever-growing academic publications and over-familiarity of terms easily lead to missing citations. To deal with this situation, we design a special method Citation Recommendation for Published Scientific Entity (CRPSE) based on the cooccurrences between published scientific entities and in-text citations in the same sentences from previous researchers. Experimental outcomes show the effectiveness of our method in recommending the source papers for published scientific entities. We further conduct a statistical analysis on missing citations among papers published in prestigious computer science conferences in 2020. In the 12,278 papers collected, 475 published scientific entities of computer science and mathematics are found to have missing citations. Many entities mentioned without citations are found to be well-accepted research results. On a median basis, the papers proposing these published scientific entities with missing citations were published 8 years ago, which can be considered the time frame for a published scientific entity to develop into a well-accepted concept. For published scientific entities, we appeal for accurate and full citation of their source papers as required by academic standards.

We introduce the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine) Dataset for Scientific Entity Extraction, Classification, and Resolution, version 1.0 (STEM-ECR v1.0). The STEM-ECR v1.0 dataset has been developed to provide a benchmark for the evaluation of scientific entity extraction, classification, and resolution tasks in a domain-independent fashion. It comprises abstracts in 10 STEM disciplines that were found to be the most prolific ones on a major publishing platform. We describe the creation of such a multidisciplinary corpus and highlight the obtained findings in terms of the following features: 1) a generic conceptual formalism for scientific entities in a multidisciplinary scientific context; 2) the feasibility of the domain-independent human annotation of scientific entities under such a generic formalism; 3) a performance benchmark obtainable for automatic extraction of multidisciplinary scientific entities using BERT-based neural models; 4) a delineated 3-step entity resolution procedure for human annotation of the scientific entities via encyclopedic entity linking and lexicographic word sense disambiguation; and 5) human evaluations of Babelfy returned encyclopedic links and lexicographic senses for our entities. Our findings cumulatively indicate that human annotation and automatic learning of multidisciplinary scientific concepts as well as their semantic disambiguation in a wide-ranging setting as STEM is reasonable.