Do Lexical and Contextual Coreference Resolution Systems Degrade Differently under Mention Noise? An Empirical Study on Scientific Software Mentions
This work provides practical guidance for selecting coreference resolution systems in scientific text processing, based on noise profiles and corpus scale.
The study compared two coreference resolution systems for scientific software mentions, finding that Context Aware Representations (CAR) outperformed Fuzzy Matching (FM) by 1 F1 point (0.94-0.96 CoNLL F1) and degraded less under boundary noise (0.07 vs. 0.20 F1 loss), while FM was more robust to mention substitution (0.52 vs. 0.63 F1 loss).
We present our participation in the SOMD 2026 shared task on cross-document software mention coreference resolution, where our systems ranked second across all three subtasks. We compare two fine-tuning-free approaches: Fuzzy Matching (FM), a lexical string-similarity method, and Context Aware Representations (CAR), which combines mention-level and document-level embeddings. Both achieve competitive performance across all subtasks (CoNLL F1 of 0.94-0.96), with CAR consistently outperforming FM by 1 point on the official test set, consistent with the high surface regularity of software names, which reduces the need for complex semantic reasoning. A controlled noise-injection study reveals complementary failure modes: as boundary noise increases, CAR loses only 0.07 F1 points from clean to fully corrupted input, compared to 0.20 for FM, whereas under mention substitution, FM degrades more gracefully (0.52 vs. 0.63). Our inference-time analysis shows that FM scales superlinearly with corpus size, whereas CAR scales approximately linearly, making CAR the more efficient choice at large scale. These findings suggest that system selection should be informed by both the noise profile of the upstream mention detector and the scale of the target corpus. We release our code to support future work on this underexplored task.