Active learning in annotating micro-blogs dealing with e-reputation

Elections unleash strong political views on Twitter, but what do people really think about politics? Opinion and trend mining on micro blogs dealing with politics has recently attracted researchers in several fields including Information Retrieval and Machine Learning (ML). Since the performance of ML and Natural Language Processing (NLP) approaches are limited by the amount and quality of data available, one promising alternative for some tasks is the automatic propagation of expert annotations. This paper intends to develop a so-called active learning process for automatically annotating French language tweets that deal with the image (i.e., representation, web reputation) of politicians. Our main focus is on the methodology followed to build an original annotated dataset expressing opinion from two French politicians over time. We therefore review state of the art NLP-based ML algorithms to automatically annotate tweets using a manual initiation step as bootstrap. This paper focuses on key issues about active learning while building a large annotated data set from noise. This will be introduced by human annotators, abundance of data and the label distribution across data and entities. In turn, we show that Twitter characteristics such as the author's name or hashtags can be considered as the bearing point to not only improve automatic systems for Opinion Mining (OM) and Topic Classification but also to reduce noise in human annotations. However, a later thorough analysis shows that reducing noise might induce the loss of crucial information.Comment: Journal of Interdisciplinary Methodologies and Issues in Science - Vol 3 - Contextualisation digitale - 201

TripleSent: a triple store of events associated with their prototypical sentiment

The current generation of sentiment analysis systems is limited in their real-world applicability because they cannot detect utterances that implicitly carry positive or negative sentiment. We present early stage research ideas to address this inability with the development of a dynamic triple store of events associated with their prototypical sentiment

Towards modelling dialectic and eristic argumentation on the social web

Modelling arguments on the social web is a key challenge for those studying computational argumentation. This is because formal models of argumentation tend to assume dialectic and logical argument, whereas argumentation on the social web is highly eristic. In this paper we explore this gap by bringing together the Argument Interchange Format (AIF) and the Semantic Interlinked Online Communities (SIOC) project, and modelling a sample of social web arguments. This allows us to explore which eristic effects cannot be modelled, and also to see which features of the social web are missing.We show that even in our small sample, from YouTube, Twitter and Facebook, eristic effects (such as playing to the audience) were missing from the final model, and that key social features (such as likes and dislikes) were also not represented. This suggests that both eristic and social extensions need to be made to our models of argumentation in order to deal effectively with the social we

Sentiment and behaviour annotation in a corpus of dialogue summaries

This paper proposes a scheme for sentiment annotation. We show how the task can be made tractable by focusing on one of the many aspects of sentiment: sentiment as it is recorded in behaviour reports of people and their interactions. Together with a number of measures for supporting the reliable application of the scheme, this allows us to obtain sufficient to good agreement scores (in terms of Krippendorf's alpha) on three key dimensions: polarity, evaluated party and type of clause. Evaluation of the scheme is carried out through the annotation of an existing corpus of dialogue summaries (in English and Portuguese) by nine annotators. Our contribution to the field is twofold: (i) a reliable multi-dimensional annotation scheme for sentiment in behaviour reports; and (ii) an annotated corpus that was used for testing the reliability of the scheme and which is made available to the research community

Empirical Methodology for Crowdsourcing Ground Truth

The process of gathering ground truth data through human annotation is a major bottleneck in the use of information extraction methods for populating the Semantic Web. Crowdsourcing-based approaches are gaining popularity in the attempt to solve the issues related to volume of data and lack of annotators. Typically these practices use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in many domains, such as event detection, there is ambiguity in the data, as well as a multitude of perspectives of the information examples. We present an empirically derived methodology for efficiently gathering of ground truth data in a diverse set of use cases covering a variety of domains and annotation tasks. Central to our approach is the use of CrowdTruth metrics that capture inter-annotator disagreement. We show that measuring disagreement is essential for acquiring a high quality ground truth. We achieve this by comparing the quality of the data aggregated with CrowdTruth metrics with majority vote, over a set of diverse crowdsourcing tasks: Medical Relation Extraction, Twitter Event Identification, News Event Extraction and Sound Interpretation. We also show that an increased number of crowd workers leads to growth and stabilization in the quality of annotations, going against the usual practice of employing a small number of annotators.Comment: in publication at the Semantic Web Journa

Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse

The goal of argumentation mining, an evolving research field in computational linguistics, is to design methods capable of analyzing people's argumentation. In this article, we go beyond the state of the art in several ways. (i) We deal with actual Web data and take up the challenges given by the variety of registers, multiple domains, and unrestricted noisy user-generated Web discourse. (ii) We bridge the gap between normative argumentation theories and argumentation phenomena encountered in actual data by adapting an argumentation model tested in an extensive annotation study. (iii) We create a new gold standard corpus (90k tokens in 340 documents) and experiment with several machine learning methods to identify argument components. We offer the data, source codes, and annotation guidelines to the community under free licenses. Our findings show that argumentation mining in user-generated Web discourse is a feasible but challenging task.Comment: Cite as: Habernal, I. & Gurevych, I. (2017). Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse. Computational Linguistics 43(1), pp. 125-17

Information extraction from multimedia web documents: an open-source platform and testbed

The LivingKnowledge project aimed to enhance the current state of the art in search, retrieval and knowledge management on the web by advancing the use of sentiment and opinion analysis within multimedia applications. To achieve this aim, a diverse set of novel and complementary analysis techniques have been integrated into a single, but extensible software platform on which such applications can be built. The platform combines state-of-the-art techniques for extracting facts, opinions and sentiment from multimedia documents, and unlike earlier platforms, it exploits both visual and textual techniques to support multimedia information retrieval. Foreseeing the usefulness of this software in the wider community, the platform has been made generally available as an open-source project. This paper describes the platform design, gives an overview of the analysis algorithms integrated into the system and describes two applications that utilise the system for multimedia information retrieval