MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103251029

Prior versus Contextual Emotion of a Word in a Sentence

2012· article· en· W2103251029 on OpenAlexaff
Diman Ghazi, Diana Inkpen, Stan Śzpakowicz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentenceComputer scienceNatural language processingWord (group theory)Task (project management)Context (archaeology)Focus (optics)Artificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Set (abstract data type)Affect (linguistics)Function (biology)Interpretation (philosophy)LinguisticsPsychologyCommunication
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A set of words labelled with their prior emotion is an obvious place to start on the automatic discovery of the emotion of a sentence, but it is clear that context must also be considered. No simple function of the labels on the individual words may capture the overall emotion of the sentence; words are interrelated and they mutually influence their affectrelated interpretation. We present a method which enables us to take the contextual emotion of a word and the syntactic structure of the sentence into account to classify sentences by emotion classes. We show that this promising method outperforms both a method based on a Bag-of-Words representation and a system based only on the prior emotions of words. The goal of this work is to distinguish automatically between prior and contextual emotion, with a focus on exploring features important for this task. 1

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207