The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning with compositional semantics as structural inference for subsentential sentiment analysis
Open accessAbstract
Determining the polarity of a sentiment-bearing expression requires more than a simple bag-of-words approach. In particular, words or constituents within the expression can interact with each other to yield a particular overall polarity. In this paper, we view such subsentential interactions in light of compositional semantics, and present a novel learning-based approach that incorporates structural inference motivated by compositional semantics into the learning procedure. Our experiments show that (1) simple heuristics based on compositional semantics can perform better than learning-based methods that do not incorporate compositional semantics (accuracy of 89.7% vs. 89.1%), but (2) a method that integrates compositional semantics into learning performs better than all other alternatives (90.7%). We also find that "content-word negators", not widely employed in previous work, play an important role in determining expression-level polarity. Finally, in contrast to conventional wisdom, we find that expression-level classification accuracy uniformly decreases as additional, potentially disambiguating, context is considered.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
WordNet: a lexical database for English
Miller, G. A. (1995) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/219717.219748 · Cited by 14,015
Cited by
Lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis
Taboada, M., Brooke, J., Tofiloski, M., Voll, K., & Stede, M. (2011) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00049 · Cited by 3,301
Sentiment strength detection in short informal text
Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., Cai, D., & Kappas, A. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21416 · Cited by 1,449
Mohammad, S. M. (2016) · Emotion Measurement · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-100508-8.00009-6 · Cited by 391
That is your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate
Walker, M. A., Anand, P., Abbott, R., Tree, J. E. F., Martell, C., & King, J. (2012) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.032 · Cited by 104
Argument Strength is in the Eye of the Beholder: Audience Effects in Persuasion
Lukin, S., Anand, P., Walker, M., & Whittaker, S. (2017) · Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers · doi:10.18653/v1/e17-1070 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Choi, Y., & Cardie, C.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '08
- Published
- 2008
- Pages
- 793
- OpenAlex
- W2160052288
- Cited by
- 332
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.89
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.