Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36628328›Full record

ArticleArtificial intelligence review2023

Survey on sentiment analysis: evolution of research methods and topics.

Jingfeng Cui, Zhaoxia Wang, Seng-Beng Ho, Erik Cambria

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Artificial intelligence review, 2023. 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. 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.

Jingfeng CuiInstitute of High Performance Computing, ASTAR, 1 Fusionopolis Way, Singapore, 138632 Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8306-0727
Zhaoxia WangSchool of Computing and Information Systems, Singapore Management University, 80 Stamford Rd, Singapore, 178902 Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7674-5488
Seng-Beng HoInstitute of High Performance Computing, ASTAR, 1 Fusionopolis Way, Singapore, 138632 Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4839-1509
Erik CambriaSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore, 639798 Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-3030-1280

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sentiment analysis, one of the research hotspots in the natural language processing field, has attracted the attention of researchers, and research papers on the field are increasingly published. Many literature reviews on sentiment analysis involving techniques, methods, and applications have been produced using different survey methodologies and tools, but there has not been a survey dedicated to the evolution of research methods and topics of sentiment analysis. There have also been few survey works leveraging keyword co-occurrence on sentiment analysis. Therefore, this study presents a survey of sentiment analysis focusing on the evolution of research methods and topics. It incorporates keyword co-occurrence analysis with a community detection algorithm. This survey not only compares and analyzes the connections between research methods and topics over the past two decades but also uncovers the hotspots and trends over time, thus providing guidance for researchers. Furthermore, this paper presents broad practical insights into the methods and topics of sentiment analysis, while also identifying technical directions, limitations, and future work.

Indexed as

Evolution analysisKeyword co-occurrence analysisResearch methodsResearch topicsSentiment analysis

Identifiers

PMID36628328
PMCPMC9816550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.