Topic-Based Paper Classification for Structured Proposal Reviews

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing literature review generation methods for research proposals lack structured subsections and fail to adequately map scientific articles to high-level thematic categories, leading to monolithic and biased reviews, especially in the early stages of proposal writing where citation texts are unavailable.

Innovation Solution

A processor-implemented method involving a two-stage approach using a topic-based retriever (TR) and classifier (TC) model to classify scientific papers based on topic, utilizing pseudo-positive and negative reference text spans, and enhanced regular expressions to extract relevant text chunks.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If existing literature review generation methods are used, then automated review generation is achieved, but the reviews lack structured subsections and fail to map articles to thematic categories, resulting in monolithic and biased reviews

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautomated literature review generationVSAvoidthematic categorization and structured organization
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the literature review into multiple thematic subsections by classifying retrieved scientific articles into different topic categories. The system divides the monolithic review into structured sections, each dedicated to a specific theme or topic, thereby preserving thematic information while maintaining automation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary classification system that acts as a mediator between the automated retrieval process and the final literature review. This intermediary layer maps articles to thematic categories, ensuring that structured organization is maintained throughout the automated generation process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Measurement precision

If citation text based retrieval is used, then precise article retrieval is achieved, but citation texts are unavailable in early stages of research proposal writing

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvearticle retrieval precisionVSAvoidproposal writing timeline
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary retrieval of scientific articles using available proposal information (title, abstract, keywords) before citation texts are generated. By retrieving articles in advance based on preliminary criteria, the system eliminates waiting time while maintaining retrieval quality through subsequent refinement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of waiting for citation texts to become available before retrieving articles, the patent inverts the approach by first retrieving articles using available proposal metadata, then later refining the retrieval using generated citation texts. This reversal enables early-stage automation without sacrificing precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

3Adaptability or versatility

If existing classification approaches are used, then article categorization is achieved, but the classification lacks alignment with proposal-specific topics and research contexts

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvearticle categorization capabilityVSAvoidalignment with proposal topics
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by customizing the classification process for each specific research proposal. Instead of using a generic classification system, the model is trained and adapted to recognize topic-specific terminology, research contexts, and thematic structures relevant to each proposal, thereby ensuring reliable alignment with proposal-specific topics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent dynamically adjusts classification parameters based on the specific research proposal being processed. The system modifies topic definitions, classification thresholds, and model weights to match the unique characteristics of each proposal, ensuring that article categorization reliably reflects the specific research context and topics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP4650982A1Method and system for topic-based classification of scientific papers to research proposal
Publication Date: 2025.11.19 TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD
  • EP4650982A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4650982A1 patent drawingFigure 2A
  • EP4650982A1 patent drawingFigure 2B

AI summary

For categorizing literature for a specific target proposal, authors face challenges while organizing their papers in diverse ways. Embodiments of the present disclosure provide method and system for classification of scientific papers to research proposal based on topic. A constructed dataset with a positive and negative reference text spans are augmented to obtain an extended dataset. Top-k chunks from a reference paper relevant to the citation text are considered as the reference text spans. A topic-based retriever model is trained on subset of the extended dataset by the positive reference text span, and the negative reference text span. A topic classifier model is trained using research proposal title, the proposal topic, and the reference text span from the reference paper to classy if the reference paper is aligned to the topic. A reference paper to be relevant to the proposal topic is classified with corresponding topics in the research proposal.