MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392359194 · doi:10.18280/ria.380107

Textual Analysis for Public Sentiment Toward National Police Using CRISP-DM Framework

2024· article· en· W4392359194 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Latifa Z.S. Sudar, Joash L. Imbenay, Indra Budi, Amanah Ramadiah, Prabu Kresna Putra, Aris Budi Santoso

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentiment analysisComputer scienceData scienceNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, public opinion toward the National Police's (POLRI) image is deteriorating.With the explosive growth of social media in Indonesia, opinions on POLRI-related present-day issues on Twitter easily go viral, influencing sentiments among individuals regarding Indonesian law enforcement.Negative sentiments, at some point, may lead to the undervaluation of law enforcement and the failure of the legal system.Therefore, sentiment analysis on Twitter is essential for gaining considerable insights into public views and attitudes on POLRI-related topics.This research is to determine the most effective approaches between Lexicon, a natural language processing method that relies on a corpus, and machine learning, which contains Naive-Bayes, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, and Logistic Regression (LR).These approaches have differences in classification types: probability and linearity.To organize the research process, the Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining (CRISP-DM) Framework, which comprises five data mining activities, was employed.The confusion matrix was used as the model performance measurement, with Naive-Bayes emerging as the best among all the tested models.Additionally, the subjects related to POLRI were developed using topic modeling, generating three topics: street police or police station, police acknowledgment in neighborhood activities, and the activity of contacting the police.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207