MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321728098 · doi:10.18178/ijlll.2015.1.3.32

Tracking Emotions in Hot Topics: Exploiting Event-Specific Emotional Words

2015· article· en· W2321728098 on OpenAlexaff
Yun Niu, Shihong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Languages Literature and Linguistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEvent (particle physics)Tracking (education)Cognitive psychologyPsychologyComputer scienceEmotion detectionNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceEmotion recognitionAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A word often conveys different emotions depending on its context.For example, in social media, emotional words in comments made on hot spot social events often denote emotions specific to the topic, which may be different from that when examined out of context.Nonetheless, contextual emotions of words has not been given much attention in current work of emotion analysis.This paper proposes an approach to identify event-specific emotional words and predict their emotion labels.These words are then used to track emotions in microblog posts using both rule-based and supervised approaches.Experimental results show that exploiting the detected words substantially improved the performance of emotion analysis.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Languages Literature and LinguisticsSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207