MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164507854 · doi:10.18280/ria.350209

A Multilabel Classifier for Text Classification and Enhanced BERT System

2021· article· en· W3164507854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bhavana R. Bhamare, Jeyanthi Prabhu

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)PoolingWord embeddingMachine learningEncoderSentiment analysisEmbeddingNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Now-a-day, a vast variety of reviews are published on the web. As a result, an automated system to analyze and extract knowledge from such textual data is needed. Sentiment analysis is a well-known sub-area in Natural Language Processing (NLP). In earlier research, sentiments were determined without considering the aspects specified in a review instance. Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) has caught the attention of researchers. Many existing systems consider ABSA as a single label classification problem. This drawback is handled in this study by proposing three approaches that use multilabel classifiers for classification. In the first approach, the performance of a model with hybrid features is analyzed using the multilabel classifier. The hybrid feature set includes word dependency rule-based features and unigram features selected using the proposed two-phase weighted correlation feature selection (WCFS) approach. In the second and third approaches Bidirectional Encoder Representation from Transformers (BERT) language model is used. In the second approach, a BERT system is enhanced by applying max pooling on target terms which specify an aspect of a review instance and a multibit label is given as input to the BERT system. In the third approach, the basic BERT system is used for word embedding only and classification is done using multilabel classifiers. In all approaches, the label used for all training instances specifies aspects with its sentiments. The experimentation shows that the results gained using the system proposed in the first approach are comparable to the results gained using the BERT system. The experimental results depict that the Enhanced BERT system gives better results compared to the existing systems.

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 score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207