Cited by 746Sentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningEmotion and Mood RecognitionMental Health via Writing

SemEval-2018 Task 1: Affect in Tweets

Open access
Mohammad, Saif, Bravo-Marquez, Felipe, Salameh, Mohammad, Kiritchenko, Svetlana·2018·Proceedings of The 12th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation

Abstract

We present the SemEval-2018 Task 1: Affect in Tweets, which includes an array of subtasks on inferring the affectual state of a person from their tweet.For each task, we created labeled data from English, Arabic, and Spanish tweets.The individual tasks are: 1. emotion intensity regression, 2. emotion intensity ordinal classification, 3. valence (sentiment) regression, 4. valence ordinal classification, and 5. emotion classification.Seventy-five teams (about 200 team members) participated in the shared task.We summarize the methods, resources, and tools used by the participating teams, with a focus on the techniques and resources that are particularly useful.We also analyze systems for consistent bias towards a particular race or gender.The data is made freely available to further improve our understanding of how people convey emotions through language.

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 · 10.18653/v1/s18-1001

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • Most existing models for MLEC do not capture emotion-specific associations that can be useful for the classification of emotions.

    “However, most existing models for MLEC do not capture emotion-specific associations that can be useful for the classification of emotions [7], [9], [10].”

    From Emotion Classification With Visibility Graphs (2025) · cites this paper as [9]

    Section 6.2 (page unavailable) says task-specific affect-lexicon features can improve emotion-related models. It does not say that most existing multi-label emotion classification models fail to capture emotion-specific associations; indeed, it reports that most top-performing systems used affect-lexicon features. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

3 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. W Parrot. 2001. Emotions in Social Psychology. Psy- chology Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mohammad, S., Bravo-Marquez, F., Salameh, M., & Kiritchenko, S.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University Qatar (QA)
  • National Research Council Canada (CA)
Venue
Proceedings of The 12th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation
Published
2018
Pages
1-17
OpenAlex
W2805744755
Cited by
746
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 98 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 1
FWCI
35.21
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • NPARC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
Keywords
affective computing, emotion recognition, tweets, social media text, sentiment analysis, emotion classification, shared task, Arabic tweets, Spanish tweets, English-language tweets, algorithmic bias, gender bias, racial bias

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