Cited by 75

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A novel approach for dimension reduction using word embedding: An enhanced text classification approach

Singh, Ksh. Nareshkumar, Devi, S. Dickeeta, Devi, H. Mamata, Mahanta, Anjana Kakoti·2022·International Journal of Information Management Data Insights

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100061

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 1 Proposed system design for classification.
Fig. 1 Proposed system design for classification.CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 2 PCA graph for BBC.
Fig. 2 PCA graph for BBC.CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 3 PCA graph for Classic4.
Fig. 3 PCA graph for Classic4.CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 4 PCA graph for 20-newsgroup.
Fig. 4 PCA graph for 20-newsgroup.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 6
CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Adikari, 2021, Value co-creation for open innovation: An evidence-based study of the data driven paradigm of social media using machine learning, International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 1, 10.1016/j.jjimei.2021.100022 · DOI
  2. Andrews, M. (2016). Compressing Word Embeddings. The 23rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing (ICONIP), Japan. http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.06397 · DOI
  3. Blum, 1997, Selection of relevant features and examples in machine learning, Artificial Intelligence, 97, 245, 10.1016/S0004-3702(97)00063-5 · DOI
  4. Carreira-Perpinan, M. A. (.1997). A review of dimension reduction techniques. technical report cs 96-09, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Sheffield.
  5. Chunxiu, 2007, Research of Word Similarity Computation, Information studies: Theory & Application, 6, 22
  6. Dong, 2001, Construction of a Knowledge System and its Impact on Chinese Research, Comtemporary Linguistics, 3, 33
  7. Dumais, 2005, Latent Semantic Analysis, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 38, 188, 10.1002/aris.1440380105 · DOI
  8. Dzisevic, 2019, Text Classification using Different Feature Extraction Approaches, Open Conference of Electrical, Electronic and Information Sciences (eStream), 10.1109/eStream.2019.8732167 · DOI
  9. Hoque, 2014, MIFS-ND: A mutual information-based feature selection method, Expert Systems with Applications, 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.04.019 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Jindal, 2015, Techniques for text classification: Literature review and current trends, Webology, 12
  11. Karl, 1901, On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space, Philosophical Magazine Series, 2, 559, 10.1080/14786440109462720 · DOI
  12. Khan, 2010, A Review of Machine Learning Algorithms for Text-Documents Classification, Journal of Advances in Information Technology, 1, 4
  13. Kim, 2005, Dimension Reduction in Text Classification with Support Vector Machines, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6, 37
  14. Kushwaha, 2021, Applications of big data in emerging management disciplines: A literature review using text mining, International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 1, 10.1016/j.jjimei.2021.100017 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Landauer, 1998, An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis, Discourse Processes, 25, 259, 10.1080/01638539809545028 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Ling, S., Song, Y., & Roth, D. (2016). Word embeddings with limited memory. Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Germany, 387–392. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-2063 · DOI
  17. Miller, 1991, Introduction to WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database, International Journal of Lexicography, 3, 235, 10.1093/ijl/3.4.235 · DOI
  18. Mitchell, 1997, 20 Newsgroups [Data set], UCI Machine Learning Repository
  19. Neogi, 2021, Sentiment analysis and classification of Indian farmers’ protest using twitter data, International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 1, 1, 10.1016/j.jjimei.2021.100019 · DOI
  20. Pechenizkiy, 2006, On combining principal components with Fisher's linear discriminants for supervised learning, Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences, 31, 59
  21. Rosario, 2001, Latent Semantic Indexing: An Overview, INFOSYS, 240
  22. Sumithra, 2015, A Review of Various Linear and Non Linear Dimensionality Reduction Techniques, International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies (IJCSIT), 6, 2354
  23. Tang, 2014, A New Method Combining LDA and PLS for Dimension Reduction, PLoS One, 9, E96944, 10.1371/journal.pone.0096944 · DOI
  24. Yao, 2017, A feature selection method based on synonym merging in text classification system, EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 166, 1
  25. Zhang, 2004, A WordNet-Based approach to feature selection in text categorization, Intelligent Information Processing, II, 475

Metadata

Authors
Singh, K. N., Devi, S. D., Devi, H. M., & Mahanta, A. K.
Venue
International Journal of Information Management Data Insights
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-04
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
100061
ISSN
2667-0968
Cited by
75
References
4
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review