MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360764647 · doi:10.1109/icmla55696.2022.00027

Towards Emotion Cause Generation in Natural Language Processing using Deep Learning

2022· article· en· W4360764647 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTask (project management)Computer scienceGenerative grammarArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingEmotion recognitionTask analysisEmotion classificationDeep learningCognitive psychologySpeech recognitionPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotion Cause Analysis (ECA) has recently garnered substantial attention from the researcher community. In addition to devising various techniques to solve ECA related problems, researchers also introduced different variants of the ECA tasks such as Emotion Cause Extraction (ECE), Emotion Cause Pair Extraction (ECPE), Emotion Cause Span Extraction (ECSE). These are primarily classification tasks where the cause of the emotion and/or type of the emotion expressed in the text are identified. In this paper, we propose a new ECA related task named Emotion Cause Generation (ECG). This is a generative task that aims to generate meaningful cause for an emotion expressed in a given text. We demonstrate the viability of this newly proposed task with promising early observation.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207