Exploring Joint Neural Model for Sentence Level Discourse Parsing and Sentiment 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
Discourse Parsing and Sentiment Analysis are two fundamental tasks in Natural Language Processing that have been shown to be mutually beneficial. In this work, we design and compare two Neural models for jointly learning both tasks. In the proposed approach, we first create a vector representation for all the text segments in the input sentence. Next, we apply three different Recursive Neural Net models: one for discourse structure prediction, one for discourse relation prediction and one for sentiment analysis. Finally, we combine these Neural Nets in two different joint models: Multi-tasking and Pre-training. Our results on two standard corpora indicate that both methods result in improvements in each task but Multi-tasking has a bigger impact than Pre-training. Specifically for Discourse Parsing, we see improvements in the prediction on the set of contrastive relations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it