In automated scientific document analysis, accurately interpreting math formulae is imperative alongside comprehending natural language. Ambiguity in math identifiers within a single document poses significant challenges to understanding math formulae. While disambiguating math identifiers across documents has seen some progress, resolving ambiguity within a document remains inadequately researched due to complexity and insufficient datasets. The level of difficulty and information required to accomplish this task was uncertain. This study aims to determine which information is necessary for the intra-document disambiguation of math identifiers. Our findings indicate that the position data and local formula structure surrounding the identifiers, including modifiers, are particularly critical. For our study, we expanded a dataset for formula grounding and doubled its size to include annotations for 27,655 math identifier occurrences. We have created a multi-layer perceptron model that performs similarly to humans, with an 85% accuracy and a kappa value of 0.73, outperforming rule-based baselines. We trained and evaluated the model with papers in natural language processing (NLP). Our findings were also confirmed valid in fields other than NLP by applying the trained models to papers from various fields. These results will aid in improving mathematical language processing, such as mathematical information retrieval.

This paper outlines an automated approach to annotate mathematical identifiers in scientific papers — a process historically laborious and costly. We employ state-of-the-art LLMs, including GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, and open-source alternatives to generate a dictionary for annotating mathematical identifiers, linking each identifier to its conceivable descriptions and then assigning these definitions to the respective identifier in- stances based on context. Evaluation metrics include the CoNLL score for co-reference cluster quality and semantic correctness of the annotations.

Grounding the meaning of each symbol in math formulae is important for automated understanding of scientific documents. Generally speaking, the meanings of math symbols are not necessarily constant, and the same symbol is used in multiple meanings. Therefore, coreference relations between symbols need to be identified for grounding, and the task has aspects of both description alignment and coreference analysis. In this study, we annotated 15 papers selected from arXiv.org with the grounding information. In total, 12,352 occurrences of math identifiers in these papers were annotated, and all coreference relations between them were made explicit in each paper. The constructed dataset shows that regardless of the ambiguity of symbols in math formulae, coreference relations can be labeled with a high inter-annotator agreement. The constructed dataset enables us to achieve automation of formula grounding, and in turn, make deeper use of the knowledge in scientific documents using techniques such as math information extraction. The built grounding dataset is available at

https://sigmathling.kwarc.info/resources/grounding- dataset/.

A large amount of scientific knowledge is represented within mixed forms of natural language texts and mathematical formulae. Therefore, a collaboration of natural language processing and formula analyses, so-called mathematical language processing, is necessary to enable computers to understand and retrieve information from the documents. However, as we will show in this project, a mathematical notation can change its meaning even within the scope of a single paragraph. This flexibility makes it difficult to extract the exact meaning of a mathematical formula. In this project, we will propose a new task direction for grounding mathematical formulae. Particularly, we are addressing the widespread misconception of various research projects in mathematical information retrieval, which presume that mathematical notations have a fixed meaning within a single document. We manually annotated a long scientific paper to illustrate the task concept. Our high inter-annotator agreement shows that the task is well understood for humans. Our results indicate that it is worthwhile to grow the techniques for the proposed task to contribute to the further progress of mathematical language processing.