Compare methods

	Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (nDCG)	Citation Context and Sentiment Analysis	Mean Average Precision (MAP)
Field	Bibliometrics	Bibliometrics	Bibliometrics
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	2002	2006	2000
Originator	Kalervo Järvelin & Jaana Kekäläinen	Simone Teufel, Advaith Siddharthan & Dan Tidhar (citation function); Awais Athar (citation sentiment)	TREC / information-retrieval evaluation community; Chris Buckley & Ellen Voorhees (stability analysis)
Type	Graded-relevance ranking-evaluation pipeline with position discounting and normalization	NLP pipeline for classifying the rhetorical function and polarity of citations	Binary-relevance ranked-retrieval evaluation pipeline
Seminal source	Järvelin, K., & Kekäläinen, J. (2002). Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20(4), 422-446.	Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., & Tidhar, D. (2006). Automatic classification of citation function. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2006), 103-110.	Buckley, C., & Voorhees, E. M. (2000). Evaluating evaluation measure stability. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '00), 33-40.
Aliases	nDCG, Discounted Cumulative Gain, DCG/IDCG Normalization, Cumulated Gain Evaluation	Citation Function Classification, Citation Polarity Analysis, Citation Sentiment Detection, Citation Context Mining	MAP, Average Precision, AP, Mean AP
Related	3	3	3
Summary	Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (nDCG) is the standard metric for evaluating ranked retrieval and recommendation when relevance comes in grades rather than a simple relevant/non-relevant binary. Introduced by Kalervo Järvelin and Jaana Kekäläinen in their 2002 ACM Transactions on Information Systems paper on cumulated gain-based evaluation, nDCG rewards a system for placing highly relevant documents near the top of the ranking. It accumulates the graded relevance ('gain') of each retrieved item, discounts that gain by how far down the list the item sits, and normalizes the total against the best possible ordering so that scores fall on a comparable 0-to-1 scale across queries. Because it handles multi-level relevance and is rank-sensitive, nDCG has become the dominant effectiveness measure for web search, learning-to-rank, and academic-search evaluation.	Citation context and sentiment analysis is the scientometric text-mining technique that reads the words around a citation to recover why one paper cites another and with what attitude. Standard citation counting treats every citation as an equal, polarity-free vote, but Simone Teufel, Advaith Siddharthan and Dan Tidhar's 2006 EMNLP work showed that citations serve distinct rhetorical functions — using a method, contrasting with prior work, acknowledging a basis, or merely referencing in passing — and that these functions can be classified automatically from the citing sentence. Awais Athar's 2011 work extended this to sentiment, distinguishing positive, neutral, and negative (critical) citations using sentence-structure features. Together these methods turn the raw citation graph into a typed, sentiment-bearing graph, enabling more meaningful impact measures, better citation indexers, and summaries of how a paper has been received.	Mean Average Precision (MAP) is the classic single-number summary of ranked-retrieval effectiveness under binary relevance and the headline metric of the TREC ad hoc retrieval tracks. For a single query, average precision (AP) computes the precision of the result list at each rank where a relevant document appears and averages those values, rewarding systems that rank all relevant documents highly; MAP is then the mean of AP across a set of queries. Buckley and Voorhees's 2000 SIGIR analysis of evaluation-measure stability showed that average precision is among the most stable and discriminating IR measures, requiring fewer queries than alternatives like precision at a fixed cutoff to reliably tell two systems apart. MAP remains a standard reporting metric for ranked retrieval, complementing graded-relevance measures such as nDCG.