Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

An Empirical Study on Chinese Microblog Stance Detection Using Supervised and Semi-supervised Machine Learning Methods

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Natural Language Understanding and Intelligent Applications (ICCPOL 2016, NLPCC 2016)

Abstract

Nowadays, more and more people are willing to express their opinions and attitudes in the microblog platform. Stance detection refers to the task that judging whether the author of the text is in favor of or against the given target. Most of the existing literature are for the debates or online conversations, which have adequate context for inferring the authors’ stances. However, for detecting the stance in microblogs, we have to figure out the stance of the author only based on the unique and separate microblog, which sets new obstacles for this task. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study on microblog stance detection using supervised and semi-supervised machine learning methods. Different unbalanced data processing strategies and classifiers, such as Linear SVM, Naive Bayes and Random Forest, are compared using NLPCC 2016 Stance Detection Evaluation Task dataset. Experiment results show that the method based on ensemble learning and SMOTE2 unbalanced processing with sentiment word features outperforms the best submission result in NLPCC 2016 Evaluation Task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jieba/.

  2. 2.

    http://tcci.ccf.org.cn/conference/2016/pages/page05_evadata.html.

References

  1. Thomas, M., Pang, B., Lee, L.: Get out the vote: determining support or opposition from congressional floor-debate transcripts. In: EMNLP, pp. 327–335 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Walker, M.A., Anand, P., Abbott, R., Grant, R.: Stance classification using dialogic properties of persuasion. In: HLT-NAACL, pp. 592–596 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Recasens, M., Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., Jurafsky, D.: Linguistic models for analyzing and detecting biased language. In: ACL (1), pp. 1650–1659 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Somasundaran, S., Wiebe, J.: Recognizing stances in online debates. In: ACL-IJCNLP, pp. 226–234 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Murakami, A., Raymond, R.: Support or oppose? Classifying positions in online debates from reply activities and opinion expressions. In: COLING (Posters), pp. 869–875 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Millen, D.R., Fontaine, M.A.: Multi-team facilitation of very large-scale distributed meetings. In: ECSCW, pp. 259–275 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Abbott, R., Walker, M., Anand, P., Tree, J.E.F., Bowmani, R., King, J.: How can you say such things?!?: recognizing disagreement in informal political argument. In: The Workshop on Languages in Social Media, 8 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wang, Y., Rosé, C.P.: Making conversational structure explicit: identification of initiation-response pairs within online discussions. In: HLT-NAACL, pp. 673–676 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Faulkner, A.: Automated classification of stance in student essays: an approach using stance target information and the wikipedia link-based measure. In: FLAIRS (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sobhani, P., Inkpen, D., Matwin, S.: From argumentation mining to stance classification. In: The Workshop on Argumentation Mining (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rajadesingan, A., Liu, H.: Identifying users with opposing opinions in Twitter debates. In: Kennedy, W.G., Agarwal, N., Yang, S.J. (eds.) SBP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8393, pp. 153–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05579-4_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Chawla, N.V., Bowyer, K.W., Hall, L.O., Kegelmeyer, W.P.: SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 16(1), 321–357 (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Han, H., Wang, W.-Y., Mao, B.-H.: Borderline-SMOTE: a new over-sampling method in imbalanced data sets learning. In: Huang, D.-S., Zhang, X.-P., Huang, G.-B. (eds.) ICIC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3644, pp. 878–887. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi:10.1007/11538059_91

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Batista, G.E.A.P.A., Bazzan, A.L.C., Monard, M.C.: Balancing training data for automated annotation of keywords: a case study. In: WOB, pp. 10–18 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (61370074, 61402091), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China under Grant N140404012.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shi Feng .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Liu, L., Feng, S., Wang, D., Zhang, Y. (2016). An Empirical Study on Chinese Microblog Stance Detection Using Supervised and Semi-supervised Machine Learning Methods. In: Lin, CY., Xue, N., Zhao, D., Huang, X., Feng, Y. (eds) Natural Language Understanding and Intelligent Applications. ICCPOL NLPCC 2016 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10102. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50496-4_68

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50496-4_68

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50495-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50496-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics