Overview of PAN'17: Author Identification, Author Profiling, and Author Obfuscation

[EN] The PAN 2017 shared tasks on digital text forensics were held in conjunction with the annual CLEF conference. This paper gives a high-level overview of each of the three shared tasks organized this year, namely author identification, author profiling, and author obfuscation. For each task, we give a brief summary of the evaluation data, performance measures, and results obtained. Altogether, 29 participants submitted a total of 33 pieces of software for evaluation, whereas 4 participants submitted to more than one task. All submitted software has been deployed to the TIRA evaluation platform, where it remains hosted for reproducibility purposes.The work at the Universitat Politècnica de València was funded by the MINECO research project SomEMBED (TIN2015-71147-C2-1-P).Potthast, M.; Rangel-Pardo, FM.; Tschuggnall, M.; Stamatatos, E.; Rosso, P.; Stein, B. (2017). Overview of PAN'17: Author Identification, Author Profiling, and Author Obfuscation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 10456:275-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65813-1_25S27529010456Amigó, E., Gonzalo, J., Artiles, J., Verdejo, F.: A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints. Inf. Retrieval 12(4), 461–486 (2009)Bagnall, D.: Authorship clustering using multi-headed recurrent neural networks—notebook for PAN at CLEF 2016. In: Balog et al. [3] (2016). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1609/Balog, K., Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Macdonald, C. (eds.): CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs and Workshop – Working Notes Papers, 5–8 September, Évora, Portugal. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org (2016). http://www.clef-initiative.eu/publication/working-notesClarke, C.L., Craswell, N., Soboroff, I., Voorhees, E.M.: Overview of the TREC 2009 web track. Technical report, DTIC Document (2009)García, Y., Castro, D., Lavielle, V., Noz, R.M.: Discovering author groups using a $$\beta$$ β -compact graph-based clustering. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) CLEF 2017 Working Notes. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Glavaš, G., Nanni, F., Ponzetto, S.P.: Unsupervised text segmentation using semantic relatedness graphs. In: Association for Computational Linguistics (2016)Gollub, T., Stein, B., Burrows, S.: Ousting ivory tower research: towards a web framework for providing experiments as a service. In: Hersh, B., Callan, J., Maarek, Y., Sanderson, M. (eds.) 35th International ACM Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 2012), pp. 1125–1126. ACM, August 2012Gómez-Adorno, H., Aleman, Y., no, D.V., Sanchez-Perez, M.A., Pinto, D., Sidorov, G.: Author clustering using hierarchical clustering analysis. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) CLEF 2017 Working Notes. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Hagen, M., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Overview of the author obfuscation task at PAN 2017: safety evaluation revisited. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2017 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Halvani, O., Graner, L.: Author clustering based on compression-based dissimilarity scores. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) CLEF 2017 Working Notes. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Hearst, M.A.: TextTiling: segmenting text into multi-paragraph subtopic passages. Comput. Linguist. 23(1), 33–64 (1997)Kiros, R., Zhu, Y., Salakhutdinov, R.R., Zemel, R., Urtasun, R., Torralba, A., Fidler, S.: Skip-thought vectors. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pp. 3294–3302 (2015)Kocher, M., Savoy, J.: UniNE at CLEF 2017: author clustering. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) CLEF 2017 Working Notes. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Koppel, M., Akiva, N., Dershowitz, I., Dershowitz, N.: Unsupervised decomposition of a document into authorial components. In: Lin, D., Matsumoto, Y., Mihalcea, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 1356–1364 (2011)Misra, H., Yvon, F., Jose, J.M., Cappe, O.: Text segmentation via topic modeling: an analytical study. In: Proceedings of CIKM 2009, pp. 1553–1556. ACM (2009)Pevzner, L., Hearst, M.A.: A critique and improvement of an evaluation metric for text segmentation. Comput. Linguis. 28(1), 19–36 (2002)Potthast, M., Eiselt, A., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Stein, B., Rosso, P.: Overview of the 3rd international competition on plagiarism detection. In: Notebook Papers of the 5th Evaluation Lab on Uncovering Plagiarism, Authorship and Social Software Misuse (PAN), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 2011Potthast, M., Gollub, T., Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Stamatatos, E., Stein, B.: Improving the reproducibility of PAN’s shared tasks: plagiarism detection, author identification, and author profiling. In: Kanoulas, E., Lupu, M., Clough, P., Sanderson, M., Hall, M., Hanbury, A., Toms, E. (eds.) CLEF 2014. LNCS, vol. 8685, pp. 268–299. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11382-1_22Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Stein, B.: Author obfuscation: attacking the state of the art in authorship verification. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2016. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1609/Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Völske, M., Stein, B.: Crowdsourcing interaction logs to understand text reuse from the web. In: Fung, P., Poesio, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 13), pp. 1212–1221. Association for Computational Linguistics (2013). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/p13-1119Rangel, F., Celli, F., Rosso, P., Potthast, M., Stein, B., Daelemans, W.: Overview of the 3rd author profiling task at PAN 2015. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Jones, G., San Juan, E. (eds.) CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs and Workshop – Working Notes Papers, 8–11 September, Toulouse, France. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, September 2015Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Chugur, I., Potthast, M., Trenkmann, M., Stein, B., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W.: Overview of the 2nd author profiling task at PAN 2014. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Halvey, M., Kraaij, W. (eds.) CLEF 2014 Evaluation Labs and Workshop – Working Notes Papers, 15–18 September, Sheffield, UK. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, September 2014Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Franco-Salvador, M.: A low dimensionality representation for language variety identification. In: 17th International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics, CICLing. LNCS. Springer (2016). arXiv:1705.10754Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Koppel, M., Stamatatos, E., Inches, G.: Overview of the author profiling task at PAN 2013. In: Forner, P., Navigli, R., Tufis, D. (eds.) CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs and Workshop – Working Notes Papers, 23–26 September, Valencia, Spain (2013)Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Overview of the 5th author profiling task at PAN 2017: gender and language variety identification in Twitter. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2017 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2017Rangel, F., Rosso, P., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Potthast, M., Stein, B.: Overview of the 4th author profiling task at PAN 2016: cross-genre evaluations. In: Balog et al. [3]Riedl, M., Biemann, C.: TopicTiling: a text segmentation algorithm based on LDA. In: Proceedings of ACL 2012 Student Research Workshop, pp. 37–42. Association for Computational Linguistics (2012)Scaiano, M., Inkpen, D.: Getting more from segmentation evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. pp. 362–366. Association for Computational Linguistics (2012)Stamatatos, E., Tschuggnall, M., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Specht, G., Stein, B., Potthast, M.: Clustering by authorship within and across documents. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1609/Stamatatos, E., Tschuggnall, M., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Specht, G., Stein, B., Potthast, M.: Clustering by authorship within and across documents. In: Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 2016Tschuggnall, M., Stamatatos, E., Verhoeven, B., Daelemans, W., Specht, G., Stein, B., Potthast, M.: Overview of the author identification task at PAN-2017: style breach detection and author clustering. In: Cappellato, L., Ferro, N., Goeuriot, L., Mandl, T. (eds.) Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2017 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CLEF and CEUR-WS.org, September 201

Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP

We survey 146 papers analyzing "bias" in NLP systems, finding that their motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning, despite the fact that analyzing "bias" is an inherently normative process. We further find that these papers' proposed quantitative techniques for measuring or mitigating "bias" are poorly matched to their motivations and do not engage with the relevant literature outside of NLP. Based on these findings, we describe the beginnings of a path forward by proposing three recommendations that should guide work analyzing "bias" in NLP systems. These recommendations rest on a greater recognition of the relationships between language and social hierarchies, encouraging researchers and practitioners to articulate their conceptualizations of "bias"---i.e., what kinds of system behaviors are harmful, in what ways, to whom, and why, as well as the normative reasoning underlying these statements---and to center work around the lived experiences of members of communities affected by NLP systems, while interrogating and reimagining the power relations between technologists and such communities

In no uncertain terms : a dataset for monolingual and multilingual automatic term extraction from comparable corpora

Automatic term extraction is a productive field of research within natural language processing, but it still faces significant obstacles regarding datasets and evaluation, which require manual term annotation. This is an arduous task, made even more difficult by the lack of a clear distinction between terms and general language, which results in low inter-annotator agreement. There is a large need for well-documented, manually validated datasets, especially in the rising field of multilingual term extraction from comparable corpora, which presents a unique new set of challenges. In this paper, a new approach is presented for both monolingual and multilingual term annotation in comparable corpora. The detailed guidelines with different term labels, the domain- and language-independent methodology and the large volumes annotated in three different languages and four different domains make this a rich resource. The resulting datasets are not just suited for evaluation purposes but can also serve as a general source of information about terms and even as training data for supervised methods. Moreover, the gold standard for multilingual term extraction from comparable corpora contains information about term variants and translation equivalents, which allows an in-depth, nuanced evaluation

Cross-lingual Argumentation Mining: Machine Translation (and a bit of Projection) is All You Need!

Argumentation mining (AM) requires the identification of complex discourse structures and has lately been applied with success monolingually. In this work, we show that the existing resources are, however, not adequate for assessing cross-lingual AM, due to their heterogeneity or lack of complexity. We therefore create suitable parallel corpora by (human and machine) translating a popular AM dataset consisting of persuasive student essays into German, French, Spanish, and Chinese. We then compare (i) annotation projection and (ii) bilingual word embeddings based direct transfer strategies for cross-lingual AM, finding that the former performs considerably better and almost eliminates the loss from cross-lingual transfer. Moreover, we find that annotation projection works equally well when using either costly human or cheap machine translations. Our code and data are available at \url{http://github.com/UKPLab/coling2018-xling_argument_mining}.Comment: Accepted at Coling 201

SemEval 2017 Task 10: ScienceIE - Extracting Keyphrases and Relations from Scientific Publications

We describe the SemEval task of extracting keyphrases and relations between them from scientific documents, which is crucial for understanding which publications describe which processes, tasks and materials. Although this was a new task, we had a total of 26 submissions across 3 evaluation scenarios. We expect the task and the findings reported in this paper to be relevant for researchers working on understanding scientific content, as well as the broader knowledge base population and information extraction communities

A Novel ILP Framework for Summarizing Content with High Lexical Variety

Summarizing content contributed by individuals can be challenging, because people make different lexical choices even when describing the same events. However, there remains a significant need to summarize such content. Examples include the student responses to post-class reflective questions, product reviews, and news articles published by different news agencies related to the same events. High lexical diversity of these documents hinders the system's ability to effectively identify salient content and reduce summary redundancy. In this paper, we overcome this issue by introducing an integer linear programming-based summarization framework. It incorporates a low-rank approximation to the sentence-word co-occurrence matrix to intrinsically group semantically-similar lexical items. We conduct extensive experiments on datasets of student responses, product reviews, and news documents. Our approach compares favorably to a number of extractive baselines as well as a neural abstractive summarization system. The paper finally sheds light on when and why the proposed framework is effective at summarizing content with high lexical variety.Comment: Accepted for publication in the journal of Natural Language Engineering, 201