Learning Stylometric Representations for Authorship Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Authorship analysis (AA) is the study of unveiling the hidden properties of authors from textual data. It extracts an author's identity and sociolinguistic characteristics based on the reflected writing styles in the text. The process is essential for various areas, such as cybercrime investigation, psycholinguistics, political socialization, etc. However, most of the previous techniques critically depend on the manual feature engineering process. Consequently, the choice of feature set has been shown to be scenario- or dataset-dependent. In this paper, to mimic the human sentence composition process using a neural network approach, we propose to incorporate different categories of linguistic features into distributed representation of words in order to learn simultaneously the writing style representations based on unlabeled texts for AA. In particular, the proposed models allow topical, lexical, syntactical, and character-level feature vectors of each document to be extracted as stylometrics. We evaluate the performance of our approach on the problems of authorship characterization, authorship identification and authorship verification with the Twitter, blog, review, novel, and essay datasets. The experiments suggest that our proposed text representation outperforms the static stylometrics, dynamic n -grams, latent Dirichlet allocation, latent semantic analysis, distributed memory model of paragraph vectors, distributed bag of words version of paragraph vector, word2vec representations, and other baselines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it