MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1885684381 · doi:10.1177/0165551515595742

Discovering aspects of online consumer reviews

2015· article· en· W1885684381 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisProcess (computing)Similarity (geometry)Class (philosophy)Hierarchical clusteringInformation retrievalProduct (mathematics)Data miningCluster (spacecraft)Artificial intelligenceData scienceImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a fully unsupervised approach for product aspect discovery in on-line consumer reviews. We apply a two-step hierarchical clustering process in which we first cluster words representing aspects based on the semantic similarity of their contexts and then on the similarity of the hypernyms of the cluster members. Our approach also includes a method for assigning class labels to each of the clusters. We evaluated our methods on large datasets of restaurant and camera reviews and found that the two-step clustering process performed better than a single-step clustering process at identifying aspects and words refering to aspects. Finally, we compare our method to a state-of-the-art topic modelling approach by Titov and McDonald, and demonstrate better results on both datasets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.008
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it