--- license: cc-by-4.0 task_categories: - question-answering - text-retrieval language: - en tags: - scientific-literature - citation-prediction - biochemistry - chemistry - biotechnology size_categories: - n<1K --- # BioChemCite **120 citation-prediction questions in biochemistry, chemistry and biotechnology.** Given a sentence from a paper with its citation blanked out, name the paper being cited. Built in the shape of [CiteME](https://huggingface.co/datasets/bethgelab/CiteME), for the same reason and in a different literature. ## Why this exists CiteME measures *finding* rather than *reading*, which is the harder and less measured half of a research agent. But its excerpts are machine-learning papers, the densest region of any frontier model's training. A model can recognise the citation and search only to confirm it, which measures recall dressed as retrieval. These questions sit in wet-lab and process literature, where that advantage is much weaker and where the answer has to be found rather than remembered. ## Where the answers come from Nowhere expensive. JATS articles link every in-text citation to its reference, and the reference carries a DOI: ```xml 30 → … 10.1016/j.… ``` So the ground truth ships with the question. No annotation, no LLM judge, no human labelling — and therefore nothing to disagree with. ## Fields | | | |---|---| | `id` | `dq0000` … | | `excerpt` | the sentence, with the citation replaced by `[CITATION]` | | `target_doi` | DOI of the cited paper — the answer | | `target_title` | title of the cited paper | | `source_pmcid` | the article the excerpt came from | | `source_license` | always `cc by` | ## How each question was filtered Roughly one sentence in twenty survives: - **Exactly one citation.** *"as shown previously [4,7,12]"* has three right answers and no way to say which was meant. - **No author named.** *"Li et al. [CITATION]"* hands over the answer. CiteME obfuscates these; here they are dropped. - **Makes a claim.** Methods sections cite reagent suppliers in passing. An early build produced *"polymerase was obtained from Vazyme [CITATION]"* pointing at a Gibson assembly paper — unfindable, and worthless as a question. Methods, Materials and Protocol sections are excluded outright. - **120–600 characters.** Long enough to carry a specific claim, short enough to stay a citation task rather than a reading one. - **Resolves to a DOI**, so scoring is exact rather than a title-matching argument. Capped at four questions per source article, so no single paper dominates. ## Licensing **Every source article is CC BY**, verified individually against Europe PMC rather than assumed. This matters: about half the open-access literature in these fields is CC BY-NC-ND, and lifting a sentence out of an article and blanking its citation makes a derivative, which ND forbids. Filtering happens at source selection, not afterwards. `source_pmcid` is on every row so each excerpt traces back to the article it came from. ## Known limitations - **Recency.** Source articles are recent Europe PMC deposits, so the cited papers skew toward work published before them. Nothing here tests finding very new work. - **Europe PMC only**, which means life-sciences-indexed venues. Chemistry published outside PMC is under-represented, and conference proceedings are absent entirely. - **Difficulty is not calibrated.** Some excerpts describe the cited work precisely; others gesture at it. There is no per-question difficulty label and no human baseline — unlike CiteME, which has one at 69.7%. - **One citation per question** by construction, so nothing here tests disentangling a multi-citation claim. ## Building it yourself The generator is at [`benchmarks/build_domainqa.py`](https://github.com/jmbarrancoidener/vela) in the Vela repository. Re-running it produces a different draw from current Europe PMC content rather than this exact set. Built for [Vela](https://github.com/jmbarrancoidener/vela), a research agent at [Idener](https://idener.ai).