MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107845597 · doi:10.1080/1206212x.2020.1851501

A two-level deep learning approach for emotion recognition in Arabic news headlines

2020· article· en· W3107845597 on OpenAlexaff
Hoda Ahmed Galal Elsayed, Soumaya Chaffar, Samir Brahim Belhaouari, Hafsa Raissouli

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computers and Applications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQ
FundersQatar National Library
KeywordsComputer scienceSadnessSentiment analysisArtificial intelligenceDisgustMachine learningDecision treeTrigramNaive Bayes classifierHappinessConvolutional neural networkSurpriseRandom forestSupport vector machineAngerNatural language processingPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Going online has created more opportunities for newspapers to present breaking news in a timely manner. Concentrating in spreading more bad news increases the feeling of danger and depression in the society. Some authors believe on tendency of some media to be focused on sharing the bad events in life rather than the good ones because of the impact and the attraction over the audience is more significant. Sentiment analysis work has not been recognized, proposed, or documented on Arabic news because of the challenges that Arabic raises as a language including the different Arabs' dialects and its complex grammatical structure. With the emerging flow of news that cause a global panic and anxiety worldwide, this study focuses on the serious need to identify what effective role could machine learning classifiers have in the early detection process of the psychology impact on the readers by the daily news headlines. In this work, a dataset of news headlines were gathered from top popular online Arabic news sites and were annotated to seven emotional categories: anger, disgust, fear, happiness, neutral, sadness, and surprise. A convolutional neural network-based two-level approach was proposed for sentiment classification. The performance of the proposed approach was compared to six machine learning classifiers (zeroR, k-nearest neighbor, decision trees, naïve Bayes, random forest and Support vector machine) and showed better accuracy, precision, and recall.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computers and ApplicationsSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207