In a fair world, people have equitable opportunities to education, to conduct scientific research, to publish, and to get credit for their work, regardless of where they live. However, it is common knowledge among researchers that a vast number of papers accepted at top NLP venues come from a handful of western countries and (lately) China; whereas, very few papers from Africa and South America get published. Similar disparities are also believed to exist for paper citation counts. In the spirit of "what we do not measure, we cannot improve", this work asks a series of questions on the relationship between geographical location and publication success (acceptance in top NLP venues and citation impact). We first created a dataset of 70,000 papers from the ACL Anthology, extracted their meta-information, and generated their citation network. We then show that not only are there substantial geographical disparities in paper acceptance and citation but also that these disparities persist even when controlling for a number of variables such as venue of publication and sub-field of NLP. Further, despite some steps taken by the NLP community to improve geographical diversity, we show that the disparity in publication metrics across locations is still on an increasing trend since the early 2000s. We release our code and dataset here: https://github.com/iamjanvijay/acl-cite-net
翻译:在一个公平的世界里,人们有平等的机会接受教育、进行科学研究、出版和获得工作荣誉,而不管他们住在哪里。然而,研究人员普遍知道,在最高国家劳工局所在地接受的大量论文来自少数几个西方国家和(最近)中国;而来自非洲和南美洲的论文却很少出版。在纸张引用计数方面,也认为存在着类似的差异。本着“我们没有衡量的东西,我们无法改进”的精神,这项工作要求就地理位置与出版成功之间的关系提出一系列问题(在最高国家劳工局所在地和引言影响方面得到认可)。我们首先创建了70,000篇来自美国劳工局安思科的论文数据集,提取了他们的元信息,并创建了他们的引文网络。我们随后表明,不仅在纸张接受和引用方面存在着巨大的地理差异,而且在控制诸如出版地点和NLP的子领域等若干变量时,这些差异依然存在。此外,尽管国家劳工局社区为改善地域多样性采取了一些步骤,但我们展示了出版量表/数字系统在各地的差异。自2000年早期数据发布以来,我们的数据系统/网络的数据仍在不断增长。