Use GROBID for extraction of metadata from PDFs

[tobiasdiez]

Now that we have the GROBID server up and running, we can also use it to extract bibliographic metadata from PDFs.

https://grobid.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Grobid-service/
/api/processHeaderDocument

Old PR (using CERMINE instead of GROBID): #2474

[koppor]

Currently, it returns TEI XML format only, not BibTeX. I can try to patch the server accordingly. (Refs kermitt2/grobid#532 (comment))

I am curious in which cases GROBID is better than JabRef's custom implementation. It worked fine for me for IEEE and Springer LNCS. Still need to add more test cases though.

[tobiasdiez]

Would be nice if you could change the server accordingly. Grobid is the defacto standard for metadata extraction from pdf (and is used by ResearchGate, Mendeley, etc). Our implementation was really naïve and only works for a few publisher.

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!

[DesBw]

Grobid is the defacto standard for metadata extraction from pdf (and is used by ResearchGate, Mendeley, etc). Our implementation was really naïve and only works for a few publisher.

Mendeley gives junks. I havn't finished cleaning the junk Mendeley gave me 10 years ago. Using the system that Mendeley is using is really bad idea. It never gets it right.

• it is better to improve other aspects of Jabref than wasting resource on a system that will produce gibberish and unclean reference data.

[Siedlerchr]

JabRef now uses several sources for extracting metadata from PDF (XMP, embeded bibtex, DOI, Grobid) and allows comparing them

Thank you for reporting this issue. We think, that is already fixed in our development version and consequently the change will be included in the next release.

We would like to ask you to use a development build from https://builds.jabref.org/main and report back if it works for you. Please remember to make a backup of your library before trying-out this version.