Modeling and Visualization of Public Opinion Sentiment Evolution after Sichuan Luding MS6.8 Earthquake Based on LSTM Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article uses web crawling to obtain public opinion data after the Sichuan Luding MS6.8 earthquake and preprocesses this data.Aiming at the limitations of the traditional LDA topic model, an improved topic model based on LDA, TT-LDA, is proposed.the BERT model is used to encode the public opinion data, and on the basis of the BERT embedding, the BiLSTM model is used for contextualized word representation for deep feature extraction to complete the modeling of public opinion sentiment evolution.Combining the crawled data and the model, we analyze the public opinion after the Sichuan Luding MS6.8 earthquake.Three days after the earthquake, positive sentiment, neutral sentiment, and negative sentiment increase to 488498, 466832, and 516560, respectively, a total of 1471890 sentiment data, and after time evolution, the sentiment polarity intensity increases from -0.178 to -0.886, indicating that when the official announcement of the number of casualties of the accident is made, the netizens' negative sentiment fully erupts to show the post-earthquake public opinion sentiment evolution process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".