Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35898769›Full record

ArticleComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022

Deep Sentiment Analysis of Twitter Data Using a Hybrid Ghost Convolution Neural Network Model.

Mohammed Hasan Ali Al-Abyadh, Mohamed A M Iesa, Hani Abdel Hafeez Abdel Azeem, Devesh Pratap Singh, Pardeep Kumar, Mohamed Abdulamir, Asadullah Jalali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Mohammed Hasan Ali Al-AbyadhCollege of Education in Wadi Addawasir, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8964-6670
Mohamed A M IesaUmm Al Qura University, Al Qunfudah Medical College, Department of Physiology, Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
Hani Abdel Hafeez Abdel AzeemMental Health and Psychological Counseling Director of the Quality Assurance Unit, The Higher Institute of Science Administrative at Janaklis, Behera, Egypt.
Devesh Pratap SinghDepartment of Computer Science & Engineering Graphic Era, Deemed to Be University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Pardeep KumarFET, MRIIRS, Faridabad, India.
Mohamed AbdulamirDepartment of Medical Instruments Engineering Techniques, Al-Farahidi University, Baghdad 10021, Iraq.
Asadullah JalaliAmerican University of Afghanistan, STM (Science Technology Mathematics), Kabul, Afghanistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5942-1246

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several problems remain, despite the evident advantages of sentiment analysis of public opinion represented on Twitter and Facebook. On complicated training data, hybrid approaches may reduce sentiment mistakes. This research assesses the dependability of numerous hybrid approaches on a variety of datasets. Across domains and datasets, we compare hybrid models to singles. Text tweets and reviews are included in our deep sentiment analysis learning systems. The support vector machine (SVM), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and ghost model convolution neural network (CNN) are combined to get the hybrid model. The dependability and computation time of each approach were evaluated. On all datasets, hybrid models outperform single models when deep learning and SVM are combined. The traditional models were less trustworthy, and deep learning algorithms have recently shown their enormous promise in sentiment analysis. Linear transformations are used in feature maps to eliminate duplicate or related features. The ghost unit makes ghost features by taking away attributes that are both similar and duplicated from each intrinsic feature. LSTM produces higher results but takes longer to process, while CNN needs less hyperparameter adjusting and monitoring. The effectiveness of the integrated model varies depending on the work, and all performed better than the others. For hybrid deep sentiment analysis learning models, LSTM networks, CNNs, and SVMs are needed. Hybrid models are used to compare SVM, LSTM, and CNN, and we tested each method's accuracy and errors. Deep learning-SVM hybrid models improve sentiment analysis accuracy. Experimental results have shown the accuracy of the proposed model shown 91.3 percent and 91.5 percent for datasets type 1 and 8, respectively.

Indexed as

Sentiment AnalysisSocial MediaAlgorithmsHumansNeural Networks, ComputerSupport Vector Machine

Identifiers

PMID35898769
PMCPMC9313995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.