MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285364837 · doi:10.2196/33678

Classification of Twitter Vaping Discourse Using BERTweet: Comparative Deep Learning Study

2022· article· en· W4285364837 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William Baker, Jason B. Colditz, Page D. Dobbs, Huy Mai, Shyam Visweswaran, Justin Zhan, Brian A. Primack

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningMachine learningRelevance (law)Classifier (UML)Sentiment analysisRandom forestNatural language processingLanguage modelTransfer of learningTransformerInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Twitter provides a valuable platform for the surveillance and monitoring of public health topics; however, manually categorizing large quantities of Twitter data is labor intensive and presents barriers to identify major trends and sentiments. Additionally, while machine and deep learning approaches have been proposed with high accuracy, they require large, annotated data sets. Public pretrained deep learning classification models, such as BERTweet, produce higher-quality models while using smaller annotated training sets. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to derive and evaluate a pretrained deep learning model based on BERTweet that can identify tweets relevant to vaping, tweets (related to vaping) of commercial nature, and tweets with provape sentiment. Additionally, the performance of the BERTweet classifier will be compared against a long short-term memory (LSTM) model to show the improvements a pretrained model has over traditional deep learning approaches. METHODS: Twitter data were collected from August to October 2019 using vaping-related search terms. From this set, a random subsample of 2401 English tweets was manually annotated for relevance (vaping related or not), commercial nature (commercial or not), and sentiment (positive, negative, or neutral). Using the annotated data, 3 separate classifiers were built using BERTweet with the default parameters defined by the Simple Transformer application programming interface (API). Each model was trained for 20 iterations and evaluated with a random split of the annotated tweets, reserving 10% (n=165) of tweets for evaluations. RESULTS: The relevance, commercial, and sentiment classifiers achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 94.5%, 99.3%, and 81.7%, respectively. Additionally, the weighted F1 scores of each were 97.6%, 99.0%, and 86.1%, respectively. We found that BERTweet outperformed the LSTM model in the classification of all categories. CONCLUSIONS: Large, open-source deep learning classifiers, such as BERTweet, can provide researchers the ability to reliably determine if tweets are relevant to vaping; include commercial content; and include positive, negative, or neutral content about vaping with a higher accuracy than traditional natural language processing deep learning models. Such enhancement to the utilization of Twitter data can allow for faster exploration and dissemination of time-sensitive data than traditional methodologies (eg, surveys, polling research).

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207