A Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) Semantic Text Analytics Approach to Explore Topical Features in Charity Crowdfunding Campaigns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crowdfunding in the realm of the Social Web has received substantial attention, with prior research examining various aspects of campaigns, including project objectives, durations, and influential project categories for successful fundraising. These factors are crucial for entrepreneurs seeking donor support. However, the terrain of charity crowdfunding within the Social Web remains relatively unexplored, lacking comprehension of the motivations driving donations that often lack concrete reciprocation. Distinct from conventional crowdfunding that offers tangible returns, charity crowdfunding relies on intangible rewards like tax advantages, recognition posts, or advisory roles. Such details are often embedded within campaign narratives, yet, the analysis of textual content in charity crowdfunding is limited. This study introduces an inventive text analytics framework, utilizing Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to extract latent themes from textual descriptions of charity campaigns. The study has explored four different themes, two each in campaign and incentive descriptions. Campaign description’s themes are focused on child and elderly health mainly the ones who are diagnosed with terminal diseases. Incentive description’s themes are based on tax benefits, certificates, and appreciation posts. These themes, combined with numerical parameters, predict campaign success. The study was successful in using Random Forest Classifier to predict success of the campaign using both thematic and numerical parameters. The study distinguishes thematic categories, particularly medical need-based charity and general causes, based on project and incentive descriptions. In conclusion, this research bridges the gap by showcasing topic modelling utility in uncharted charity crowdfunding domains.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".