MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W640143065

How Are We Doing? Opinion Mining Customer Sentiment in US Transit Agencies and Airlines via Twitter

2012· article· en· W640143065 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Schweitzer

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentiment analysisLexiconCluster analysisSocial mediaSimple (philosophy)AdvertisingTransit (satellite)Computer sciencePublic opinionBusinessData sciencePolitical scienceArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebPublic transportLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This manuscript examines the unsolicited comments on the social media site Twitter using a simple opinion mining method. The data are scored using a commonly available, experimentally tested lexicon of words associated with both positive and negative experiences. Analysis of the scoring performance finds that even though the analysis uses a simple algorithm, the algorithm performs fairly well in clustering similar services, recognizing non-opinions, and marking both strongly positive and strongly negative assessments. Among transit agencies, Translink in Vancouver and TriMet in Portland have the least negative commentary in their feeds. Alaska Airlines and Southwest were the airlines with the most positive comments appearing on Twitter.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207