MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387854289 · doi:10.1145/3583780.3615205

Latent Aspect Detection via Backtranslation Augmentation

2023· article· en· W4387854289 on OpenAlexaff
Farinam Hemmatizadeh, Christine Wong, Alice Yu, Hossein Fani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)LaptopVocabularySemEvalNatural language processingBenchmark (surveying)Focus (optics)Artificial intelligenceData scienceSemantics (computer science)Latent semantic analysisNatural languageWorld Wide WebTask (project management)Linguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the context of review analytics, aspects are the features of products and services at which customers target their opinions and sentiments. Aspect detection helps product owners and service providers identify shortcomings and prioritize customers' needs. Existing methods focus on detecting the surface form of an aspect falling short when aspects are latent in reviews, especially in an informal context like in social posts. In this paper, we propose data augmentation via natural language backtranslation to extract latent occurrences of aspects. We presume that backtranslation (1) can reveal latent aspects because they may not be commonly known in the target language and can be generated through backtranslation; (2) augments context-aware synonymous aspects from a target language to the original language, hence addressing the out-of-vocabulary issue; and (3) helps with the semantic disambiguation of polysemous words and collocations. Through our experiments on well-known aspect detection methods across semeval datasets of restaurant and laptop reviews, we demonstrate that review augmentation via backtranslation yields a steady performance boost in baselines. We further contribute LADy at https://github.com/fani-lab/LADy, a benchmark library to support the reproducibility of our 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)0.000
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 score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207