Cited by 2,736Text and Document Classification TechnologiesMachine Learning and AlgorithmsTopic Modeling

Text classification from labeled and unlabeled documents using EM

Open access
Nigam, Kamal, Mccallum, Andrew Kachites, Thrun, Sebastian, Mitchell, Tom·2000·Machine Learning

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 · 10.1023/a:1007692713085

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Morgan Kaufmann.
  2. Lewis, D.D. & Ringuette, M. (1994). A comparison of two learning algorithms for text categorization. Third Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval (pp. 81-93).
  3. Mitchell, T.M. (1997). Machine learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Sahami, M., Dumais, S., Heckerman, D., & Horvitz, E. (1998). A Baysian approach to filtering junk e-mail. AAAI-98 Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization. Tech. Rep. WS-98-05, AAAI Press. http://robotics. stanford.edu/users/sahami/papers.html.
  5. Yang, Y. & Pederson, J.O. (1997). Feature selection in statistical learning of text categorization. Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference (ICML '97) (pp. 412-420).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nigam, K., Mccallum, A. K., Thrun, S., & Mitchell, T.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Machine Learning
Published
2000-05
Volume
39
Issue
2-3
Pages
103-134
ISSN
  • 0885-6125 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0565
OpenAlex
W2097089247
Cited by
2,736
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 117 · 2019: 139 · 2018: 125 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 119 · 2015: 122 · 2014: 121 · 2013: 133 · 2012: 142
FWCI
86.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Machine Learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
text classification, semi-supervised learning, unlabeled documents, expectation-maximization algorithm, Naive Bayes classifier, label propagation, mixture components, data weighting, limited labeled data

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