Concept Drift Adaptation in Text Stream Mining Settings: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The society produces textual data online in several ways, e.g., via reviews and social media posts. Therefore, numerous researchers have been working on discovering patterns in textual data that can indicate peoples’ opinions, interests, and so on. Most tasks regarding natural language processing are addressed using traditional machine learning methods and static datasets. This setting can lead to several problems, e.g., outdated datasets and models, which degrade in performance over time. This is particularly true regarding concept drift, in which the data distribution changes over time. Furthermore, text streaming scenarios also exhibit further challenges, such as the high speed at which data arrive over time. Models for stream scenarios must adhere to the aforementioned constraints while learning from the stream, thus storing texts for limited periods and consuming low memory. This study presents a systematic literature review regarding concept drift adaptation in text stream scenarios. Considering well-defined criteria, we selected 48 papers published between 2018 and August 2024 to unravel aspects such as text drift categories, detection types, model update mechanisms, stream mining tasks addressed, and text representation methods and their update mechanisms. Furthermore, we discussed drift visualization and simulation and listed real-world datasets used in the selected papers. Finally, we brought forward a discussion on existing works in the area, also highlighting open challenges and future research directions for the community.
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 | 0.008 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".