MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405452664 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2024.8.002

Sentiment analysis of social media discourse on public perception of online courier services in Saudi Arabia using machine learning

2024· article· en· W4405452664 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Shenify

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaComputer scienceSupport vector machineSentiment analysisDecision treeArtificial intelligenceMachine learningCrawlingThe InternetWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has witnessed a significant surge in online shopping in recent years, fueled by factors like growing internet penetration, smartphone adoption, and government initiatives supporting e-commerce growth. This rise in online activity has led to a corresponding increase in the utilization of online courier services, playing a crucial role in ensuring timely and efficient delivery of goods In this context, understanding public perception of online courier services becomes crucial for businesses to improve their offerings, address customer concerns, and maintain a competitive edge. Social media platforms have emerged as a valuable source of customer feedback and user-generated content, offering insights into customer experiences and opinions. This paper presents a sentiment analysis on online couriers in Saudi Arabia using natural language processing techniques combined with Decision Tree and Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifiers of machine learning. A dataset on customers’ sentiments was created by a crawling process from X social media. Both classifiers perform well, with Decision Tree classifier performs slightly better on accuracy, i.e. 95.01% compared to 93.60% of the Support Vector Machine. Other metrics support the robustness of the classification.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207