MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024583990

Sentiment Analysis of Swedish and Finnish Twitter Users’ Views Toward NATO Pre- And Post- 2022 2nd Russian Invasion of Ukraine

2023· article· en· W7024583990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholar Commons (University of South Carolina) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic opinionSentiment analysisPollingPopulationQuarter (Canadian coin)TreatyGovernment (linguistics)North Atlantic Treaty
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to analyze the changes in Swedes’ and Finns’ opinions toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in light of the 2022 2nd Russian Invasion of Ukraine. To do so, a large dataset of geotagged tweets containing keywords related to NATO is analyzed using lexicon-based sentiment analysis to study spatiotemporal trends. The study shows that overall discussion remains very neutral, with less than a quarter of all tweets having a non-zero sentiment score, and differs markedly from public opinion polling in both countries while spatiotemporally, the discussions is concentrated in the major population centers and exhibits little month over month variation after the commencement of hostilities.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholar Commons (University of South Carolina)Same topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207