Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Emmanuel Marchand

dblp:41/4782 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0004-6984-0291ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data integration and cleaning · 67% Information retrieval · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval
evaluation
0.912025
Multilingual Evaluation of Main Content Extractors for Web Pages · SIGIR 2025
Data integration and cleaning › data extraction › web data extraction
main content extraction
0.912025
Multilingual Evaluation of Main Content Extractors for Web Pages · SIGIR 2025
Data integration and cleaning › data extraction
web data extraction
0.912025
Multilingual Evaluation of Main Content Extractors for Web Pages · SIGIR 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

benchmark reproduction · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Multilingual Evaluation of Main Content Extractors for Web Pages
abstract
Tools designed to extract main content from web pages require thorough evaluation, yet existing benchmarks disproportionately focus on English-language datasets. Consequently, previous studies have shown that while these extractors are well-optimized for English, their effectiveness partially or entirely diminishes in other languages. This study reproduces and extends recent benchmarks by incorporating multilingual datasets as a key factor. We analyze extractor performance across five languages-Greek, English, Polish, Russian, and Chinese-highlighting the need to adapt extraction models to linguistic variations. Our results show that while some extractors maintain stable performance, others suffer significant drops in precision and recall on non-English or structurally irregular pages.
Aurélien Bournonville, Gaël Dias, Thomas Largillier, Emmanuel Marchand, Fabrice Maurel, Guillaume Pitel, François Rioult
SIGIR4