User-guided Cross-domain Sentiment Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sentiment analysis has been studied for decades, and it is widely used in many real applications such as media monitoring. In sentiment analysis, when addressing the problem of limited labeled data from the target domain, transfer learning, or domain adaptation, has been successfully applied, which borrows information from a relevant source domain with abundant labeled data to improve the prediction performance in the target domain. The key to transfer learning is how to model the relatedness among different domains. For sentiment analysis, a common practice is to assume similar sentiment polarity for the common keywords shared by different domains. However, existing methods largely overlooked the human factor, i.e., the users who expressed such sentiment. In this paper, we address this problem by explicitly modeling the human factor related to sentiment classification. In particular, we assume that the content generated by the same user across different domains is biased in the same way in terms of the sentiment polarity. In other words, optimistic/pessimistic users demonstrate consistent sentiment patterns, no matter what the context is. To this end, we propose a new graph-based approach named U-Cross, which models the relatedness of different domains via both the shared users and keywords. It is non-parametric and semi-supervised in nature. Furthermore, we also study the problem of shared user selection to prevent ‘negative transfer’. In the experiments, we demonstrate the effectiveness of U-Cross by comparing it with existing state-of-the-art techniques on three real data sets.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".