Topic Modelling and Sentiment Analysis for Twitter Freedom Convoy 2022 in Canada: An Observational Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Truck drivers gathered at Ottawa, Canada for “Freedom Convoy” to protest the COVID-19 vaccine mandate that went into effect on in mid-January 2022. The convoy has led to controversies and debates on social media, especially on Twitter. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate public discourses and sentiments regarding the Freedom Convoy on Twitter. METHODS English tweets were retrieved from Twitter API from January 15 to February 14, 2022 when the Freedom Convoy occurred. Unsupervised topic modelling and sentiment analysis were applied to identify topics and sentiments for each topic. RESULTS Five topics has resulted from the topic modelling, including protest rally, support extremes, general convoy support, government, and police. Overall, sentiments for each topic have begun with more positive or negative sentiments but approached to neutral over time. CONCLUSIONS The results have shown that sentiments towards the Freedom Convoy generally tended to be positive. Five topics were identified from the data collected, and these topics highly correlated with the events of the convoy. Our study also demonstrated that a mixed approach of unsupervised machine learning techniques and manual validation could generate timely evidence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".