Dynamic topic modeling of twitter data during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to gauge the global pandemic's impact on social thoughts and behavior, it is important to answer the following questions: (1) What kinds of topics are individuals and groups vocalizing in relation to the pandemic? (2) Are there any noticeable topic trends and if so how do these topics change over time and in response to major events? In this paper, through the advanced Sequential Latent Dirichlet Allocation model, we identified twelve of the most popular topics present in a Twitter dataset collected over the period spanning April 3rd to April 13th, 2020 in the United States and discussed their growth and changes over time. These topics were both robust, in that they covered specific domains, not simply events, and dynamic, in that they were able to change over time in response to rising trends in our dataset. They spanned politics, healthcare, community, and the economy, and experienced macro-level growth over time, while also exhibiting micro-level changes in topic composition. Our approach differentiated itself in both scale and scope to study the emerging topics concerning COVID-19 at a scale that few works have been able to achieve. We contributed to the cross-sectional field of urban studies and big data. Whereas we are optimistic towards the future, we also understand that this is an unprecedented time that will have lasting impacts on individuals and society at large, impacting not only the economy or geo-politics, but human behavior and psychology. Therefore, in more ways than one, this research is just beginning to scratch the surface of what will be a concerted research effort into studying the history and repercussions of COVID-19.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".