Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37741918›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Manifold-based sparse representation for opinion mining.

Zohre Karimi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Zohre KarimiSchool of Engineering, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran. z.karimi@du.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What the consumer thinks about an organization's products, services, and events is a crucial performance indicator for businesses. The brief opinion pieces were quickly published on websites and social media platforms and have been analyzed by machine learning methods. The classical text feature representation methods suffer from high dimensionality, sparsity, noisy, irrelevant and redundant information. This paper focuses on how to enhance feature representation for opinion mining. Some nonlinear feature selection methods based on manifold assumption have been exploited to resolve these problems. The inherent manifold configuration was commonly ascertained through a nearest neighbor graph, whereby the neighbors in the current techniques may exhibit diverse polarities. To alleviate this burden, it is proposed to exploit both manifold assumption and sparse property as prior knowledge for opinion representation to learn intrinsic structure from data. First, the graph representation of user reviews based on the mentioned prior knowledge is learned. Then, the spectral properties of the learned graph are exploited to present data in a new feature space. The proposed algorithm is applied to four various common input features on two benchmark datasets, the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) and the Amazon review dataset. Our experiments reveal that the proposed algorithm yields considerable enhancements in terms of F-measure, accuracy, and other standard performance measures compared to the combination of state-of-the-art features with various classifiers. The highest classification accuracies of 99.15 and 91.97 are obtained in the proposed method on IMDB and Amazon using a linear SVM classifier, respectively. The impact of the parameters of the proposed algorithm is also investigated in this paper. The incorporation of a sparse manifold-based representation has led to noteworthy advancements beyond the baseline, and this success serves to validate the underlying assumptions.

Identifiers

PMID37741918
PMCPMC10517976

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.