Emotional Intelligence Attention Unsupervised Learning Using Lexicon Analysis for Irony-based Advertising
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social media platforms have made increasing use of irony in recent years. Users can express their ironic thoughts with audio, video, and images attached to text content. When you use irony, you are making fun of a situation or trying to make a point. It can also express frustration or highlight the absurdity of a situation. The use of irony in social media is likely to continue to increase, no matter the reason. By using syntactic information in conjunction with semantic exploration, we show that attention networks can be enhanced. Using learned embedding, unsupervised learning encodes word order into a joint space. By evaluating the entropy of an example class and adding instances, the active learning method uses the shared representation as a query to retrieve semantically similar sentences from a knowledge base. In this way, the algorithm can identify the instance with the maximum uncertainty and extract the most informative example from the training set. An ironic network trained for each labelled record is used to train a classifier (model). The partial training model and the original labelled data generate pseudo-labels for the unlabeled data. To correctly predict the label of a dataset, a classifier (attention network) updates the pseudo-labels for the remaining datasets. After the experimental evaluation of the 1,021 annotated texts, the proposed model performed better than the baseline models, achieving an F1 score of 0.63 on ironic tasks and 0.59 on non-ironic tasks. We also found that the proposed model generalized well to new instances of datasets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".