ArticlePloS one2024
Enhancing machine learning-based sentiment analysis through feature extraction techniques.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identification of key proteins and pathways in myocardial infarction using machine learning approaches.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Enhancing aviation safety: An 80-year data-driven model for classification of aviation incident and accident.PloS one · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered Radiology-Current Status and Critical Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A crucial part of sentiment classification is featuring extraction because it involves extracting valuable information from text data, which affects the model's performance. The goal of this paper is to help in selecting a suitable feature extraction method to enhance the performance of sentiment analysis tasks. In order to provide directions for future machine learning and feature extraction research, it is important to analyze and summarize feature extraction techniques methodically from a machine learning standpoint. There are several methods under consideration, including Bag-of-words (BOW), Word2Vector, N-gram, Term Frequency- Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF), Hashing Vectorizer (HV), and Global vector for word representation (GloVe). To prove the ability of each feature extractor, we applied it to the Twitter US airlines and Amazon musical instrument reviews datasets. Finally, we trained a random forest classifier using 70% of the training data and 30% of the testing data, enabling us to evaluate and compare the performance using different metrics. Based on our results, we find that the TD-IDF technique demonstrates superior performance, with an accuracy of 99% in the Amazon reviews dataset and 96% in the Twitter US airlines dataset. This study underscores the paramount significance of feature extraction in sentiment analysis, endowing pragmatic insights to elevate model performance and steer future research pursuits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.