Data Sets: Word Embeddings Learned from Tweets and General Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A word embedding is a low-dimensional, dense and real-valued vector representation of a word. Word embeddings have been used in many NLP tasks. They are usually generated from a large text corpus. The embedding of a word captures both its syntactic and semantic aspects. Tweets are short, noisy and have unique lexical and semantic features that are different from other types of text. Therefore, it is necessary to have word embeddings learned specifically from tweets. In this paper, we present ten word embedding data sets. In addition to the data sets learned from just tweet data, we also built embedding sets from the general data and the combination of tweets and the general data. The general data consist of news articles, Wikipedia data and other web data. These ten embedding models were learned from about 400 million tweets and 7 billion words from the general data. In this paper, we also present two experiments demonstrating how to use the data sets in some NLP tasks, such as tweet sentiment analysis and tweet topic classification tasks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| 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 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".