MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087926002 · doi:10.1145/3415959.3416000

Predicting Twitter Engagement With Deep Language Models

2020· article· en· W3087926002 on OpenAlexaff
Maksims Volkovs, Zhaoyue Cheng, Mathieu Ravaut, Hojin Yang, Kevin Shen, Jin Peng Zhou, Anson Wong, Saba Zuberi, Nick Frosst, Helen Ngo, Carol Chen, Bharat Venkitesh, Stephen Gou, Aidan N. Gomez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Language modelBenchmarkingSocial mediaWorld Wide WebTask (project management)User engagementCode (set theory)Data scienceDeep learningInformation retrievalArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twitter has become one of the main information sharing platforms for millions of users world-wide. Numerous tweets are created daily, many with highly time sensitive content such as breaking news, new multimedia content or personal updates. Consequently, accurately recommending relevant tweets to users in a timely manner is a highly important and challenging problem. The 2020 ACM RecSys Challenge is aimed at benchmarking leading recommendation models for this task. The challenge is based on a large and recent dataset of over 200M tweet engagements released by Twitter with content in over 50 languages. In this work we present our approach where we leverage recent advances in deep language modeling and attention architectures, to combine information from extracted features, user engagement history and target tweet content. We first fine-tune leading multilingual language models M-BERT and XLM-R for Twitter data. Embeddings from these models are used to extract tweet and user history representations. We then combine all components together and jointly train them to maximize engagement prediction accuracy. Our approach achieves highly competitive performance placing 2’nd on the final private leaderboard. Full code is available here: https://github.com/layer6ai-labs/RecSys2020.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207