Text Sentiment Classification Based on Feature Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The convolutional neural network (CNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM) network are adept at extracting local and global features, respectively. Both can achieve excellent classification effects. However, the CNN performs poorly in extracting the global contextual information of the text, while LSTM often overlooks the features hidden between words. For text sentiment classification, this paper combines the CNN with bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) into a parallel hybrid model called CNN_BiLSTM. Firstly, the CNN was adopted to extract the local features of the text quickly. Next, the BiLSTM was employed to obtain the global text features containing contextual semantics. After that, the features extracted by the two neural networks (NNs) were fused, and processed by Softmax classifier for text sentiment classification. To verify its performance, the CNN_BiLSTM was compared with single NNs like CNN and LSTM, as well as other deep learning (DL) NNs through experiments. The experimental results show that the proposed parallel hybrid model outperformed the contrastive methods in F1-score and accuracy. Therefore, our model can solve text sentiment classification tasks effectively, and boast better practical value than other NNs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".