Cited by 12Authorship Attribution and ProfilingNatural Language Processing TechniquesUser Authentication and Security Systems

The Topic Confusion Task: A Novel Evaluation Scenario for Authorship Attribution

Open access
Altakrori, Malik, Cheung, Jackie Chi Kit, Fung, Benjamin C. M.·2021·Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021

Abstract

Authorship attribution is the problem of identifying the most plausible author of an anonymous text from a set of candidate authors.Researchers have investigated same-topic and cross-topic scenarios of authorship attribution, which differ according to whether new, unseen topics are used in the testing phase.However, neither scenario allows us to explain whether errors are caused by a failure to capture authorship writing style or by a topic shift.Motivated by this, we propose the topic confusion task where we switch the author-topic configuration between the training and testing sets.This setup allows us to distinguish two types of errors: those caused by the topic shift and those caused by the features' inability to capture the writing styles.We show that stylometric features with part-of-speech tags are the least susceptible to topic variations.We further show that combining them with other features leads to significantly lower topic confusion and higher attribution accuracy.Finally, we show that pretrained language models such as BERT and RoBERTa perform poorly on this task and are surpassed by simple features such as word-level n-grams.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.359

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Altakrori, M., Cheung, J. C. K., & Fung, B. C. M.
Affiliations
  • Mila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
Venue
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021
Published
2021
Pages
4242-4256
OpenAlex
W3214222557
Cited by
11
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Canada Research Chairs
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (rgpin-2018-03872, RGPIN 2018)
  • Fonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
Keywords
authorship attribution, topic shift, stylometry, part-of-speech features, writing style, pre-trained language models, BERT, RoBERTa, word n-grams

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