Application of Text Analysis in Emotional Expression in Contemporary Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rapid development of technology and online social networking, the popularization of smartphones has promoted the research and development of sentiment analysis of contemporary literary texts.In this paper, the CBOW model based on Hierarchical Softmax algorithm is used to extract text sentiment features.The classification mechanism of sentiment lexicon, machine learning, and deep learning methods supported by sentiment features is discussed.According to the discussion results, a 5-layer sentiment analysis model based on CNN-BiLSTM-ATT is built based on text preprocessing, and the model design of different layering is proposed.Meanwhile, the analysis method of text themes is proposed based on LDA.In the long story dataset, the model recall rate of this paper is 83.91% and the precision rate is 83.86%, the values are higher than the other six models; the Macro-F1 mean value is 83.16%, which proves that the fused and improved CNN-BiLSTM-ATT model of this paper possesses excellent performance in the sentiment analysis task.In the short story dataset, the accuracy, precision and recall are not less than 98%, and the loss rate is the lowest 34.11%, which are lower than the other six models.The model in this paper can be applied to text analysis systems and has superiority in parsing the sentiment of contemporary literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".