MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253518962 · doi:10.20431/2347-3134.0610004

Trump Tweets

2018· article· en· W4253518962 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Whissell

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNatural language processingInternet privacyPolitical scienceHistoryLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

and he continued to tweet at a high rate once in office. Twitter is a relatively new communication technology. Presidents Obama and Trump both tweeted, but Trump tweeted at a much higher rate. As reported in sources described in the Methodology section below, Obama tweeted 321 times in his last 19 months in office, while Trump tweeted 2,602 times in his first year. This research addresses the pleasantness/unpleasantness of the language in Trump's 2017 tweets. It questions whether this pleasantness/unpleasantness is related to tweet characteristics (such as their length in number of words, their inclusion of a hash tag, or their status as a reply) or to information included within tweet text (such as an American flag emoji, an exclamation mark, or a mention of CNN). These variables are employed to predict pleasantness, and pleasantness in turn is employed with the other predictors to identify popular tweets that were retweeted at a high rate.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Studies in English Language and LiteratureSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207