MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327641201 · doi:10.1109/cse57773.2022.00018

To Mask or Not To Mask? A Machine Learning Approach to Covid News Coverage Attitude Prediction Based on Time Series and Text Content

2022· article· en· W4327641201 on OpenAlexaff
Jingtian Zhao, Will Zhao, Yimin Yang, Amin Safaei, Ruizhong Wei

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of WaterlooLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Artificial intelligenceTime seriesFocus (optics)Deep learningTerm (time)Machine learningInformation retrievalNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past few decades, with the explosion of information, a large number of computer scientists have devoted themselves to analyzing collected data and applying these findings to many disciplines. Natural language processing (NLP) has been one of the most popular areas for data analysis and pattern recognition. A significantly large amount of data is obtained in text format due to the ease of access nowadays. Most modern techniques focus on exploring large sets of textual data to build forecasting models; they tend to ignore the importance of temporal information which is often the main ingredient to determine the performance of analysis, especially in the public policy view. The contribution of this paper is two-fold. First, a dataset called COVID-News is collected from three news agencies, which consists of article segments related to wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, we propose a long-short term memory (LSTM)-based learning model to predict the attitude of the articles from the three news agencies towards wearing a mask with both temporal and textural information. Experimental results on COVID-News dataset show the effectiveness of the proposed LSTM-based algorithm.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207