Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28660257›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing2016

Inducing Domain-Specific Sentiment Lexicons from Unlabeled Corpora.

William L Hamilton, Kevin Clark, Jure Leskovec, Dan Jurafsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Text Mining Oral Histories in Historical Archaeology.International journal of historical archaeology · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

William L HamiltonDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 94305.
Kevin ClarkDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 94305.
Jure LeskovecDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 94305.
Dan JurafskyDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 94305.

Funding

Training CoreU54EB020405 · NIBIB · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DELP, SCOTT L · 2014 to 2018
$11.6M
NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB020405
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A word's sentiment depends on the domain in which it is used. Computational social science research thus requires sentiment lexicons that are specific to the domains being studied. We combine domain-specific word embeddings with a label propagation framework to induce accurate domain-specific sentiment lexicons using small sets of seed words. We show that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on inducing sentiment lexicons from domain-specific corpora and that our purely corpus-based approach outperforms methods that rely on hand-curated resources (e.g., WordNet). Using our framework, we induce and release historical sentiment lexicons for 150 years of English and community-specific sentiment lexicons for 250 online communities from the social media forum Reddit. The historical lexicons we induce show that more than 5% of sentiment-bearing (non-neutral) English words completely switched polarity during the last 150 years, and the community-specific lexicons highlight how sentiment varies drastically between different communities.

Identifiers

PMID28660257
PMCPMC5483533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.