Cited by 38Sentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningText and Document Classification TechnologiesTopic Modeling

COVID-19 Tweets Classification Based on a Hybrid Word Embedding Method

Open access
Didi, Yosra, Walha, Ahlam, Wali, Ali·2022·Big Data and Cognitive Computing

Abstract

In March 2020, the World Health Organisation declared that COVID-19 was a new pandemic. This deadly virus spread and affected many countries in the world. During the outbreak, social media platforms such as Twitter contributed valuable and massive amounts of data to better assess health-related decision making. Therefore, we propose that users’ sentiments could be analysed with the application of effective supervised machine learning approaches to predict disease prevalence and provide early warnings. The collected tweets were prepared for preprocessing and categorised into: negative, positive, and neutral. In the second phase, different features were extracted from the posts by applying several widely used techniques, such as TF-IDF, Word2Vec, Glove, and FastText to capture features’ datasets. The novelty of this study is based on hybrid features extraction, where we combined syntactic features (TF-IDF) with semantic features (FastText and Glove) to represent posts accurately, which helps in improving the classification process. Experimental results show that FastText combined with TF-IDF performed better with SVM than the other models. SVM outperformed the other models by 88.72%, as well as for XGBoost, with an 85.29% accuracy score. This study shows that the hybrid methods proved their capability of extracting features from the tweets and increasing the performance of classification.

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 · 10.3390/bdcc6020058

Cites

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?

  • FastText's capability to represent problematic words enhances its generalizability.

    “This capability also enhances its generalizability (Didi et al. 2022).”

    From Large language models (LLMs): survey, technical frameworks, and future challenges (2024) · cites this paper as Didi et al. 2022

    Section 3.3.3 (FastText; page unavailable) says FastText can produce embeddings for misspelled, rare, and out-of-dictionary words. That supports its ability to handle problematic words, but the paper does not establish that this capability improves generalizability. (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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 50 · Cited by 38

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Kabir, M.; Madria, S. CoronaVis: A real-time COVID-19 tweets data analyzer and data repository. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2004.13932. · arXiv
  2. Rajput, N.K.; Grover, B.A.; Rathi, V.K. Word frequency and sentiment analysis of twitter messages during coronavirus pandemic. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2004.03925. · arXiv
  3. Ghadeer, A.S.; Aljarah, I.; Alsawalqah, H. Enhancing the Arabic sentiment analysis using different preprocessing operators. New Trends Inf. Technol. 2017, 113, 113-117.
  4. Alqurashi, S.; Hamoui, B.; Alashaikh, A.; Alhindi, A.; Alanazi, E. Eating garlic prevents COVID-19 infection: Detecting misinformation on the arabic content of twitter. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2101.05626. · arXiv
  5. Loper, E.; Bird, S. Nltk: The natural language toolkit. arXiv 2002, arXiv:0205028.
  6. Mikolov, T.; Chen, K.; Corrado, G.; Dean, J. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv 2013, arXiv:1301.3781. · arXiv
  7. Joulin, A.; Grave, E.; Bojanowski, P.; Douze, M.; Jégou, H.; Mikolov, T. Fasttext. zip: Compressing text classification models. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1612.03651. · arXiv
  8. Ho, T.K. Random decision forests. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, Montreal, QC, Canada, 14-16 August 1995; Volume 1, pp. 278-282.

Authors
Didi, Y., Walha, A., & Wali, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Sfax (TN)
  • Department of Computer Science, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah 24243, Saudi Arabia
Corresponding author
Didi, Yosra
Venue
Big Data and Cognitive Computing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-05-18
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
58
ISSN
2504-2289 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4280515006
Cited by
38
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 5
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Big Data and Cognitive Computing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Umm Al-Qura University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, Twitter, sentiment analysis, tweet classification, TF-IDF, FastText, gloves, Word2Vec, feature extraction, social media, disease prevalence prediction, early warning

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