Article

Free access

Are these documents written from different perspectives?: a test of different perspectives based on statistical distribution divergence

Authors:

Alexander HauptmannAuthors Info & Claims

ACL-44: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Pages 1057 - 1064

https://doi.org/10.3115/1220175.1220308

Published: 17 July 2006 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper we investigate how to automatically determine if two document collections are written from different perspectives. By perspectives we mean a point of view, for example, from the perspective of Democrats or Republicans. We propose a test of different perspectives based on distribution divergence between the statistical models of two collections. Experimental results show that the test can successfully distinguish document collections of different perspectives from other types of collections.

References

[1]

Robert P. Abelson and J. Douglas Carroll. 1965. Computer simulation of individual belief systems. The American Behavioral Scientist, 8:24--30, May.

[2]

Robert P. Abelson, 1973. Computer Models of Thought and Language, chapter The Structure of Belief Systems, pages 287--339. W. H. Freeman and Company.

[3]

Philip Beineke, Trevor Hastie, and Shivakumar Vaithyanathan. 2004. The sentimental factor: Improving review classification via human-provided information. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-2004).

Digital Library

[4]

Jaime G. Carbonell. 1978. POLITICS: Automated ideological reasoning. Cognitive Science, 2(1):27--51.

[5]

Thomas M. Cover and Joy A. Thomas. 1991. Elements of Information Theory. Wiley-Interscience.

Digital Library

[6]

Kushal Dave, Steve Lawrence, and David M. Pennock. 2003. Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews. In Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2003).

Digital Library

[7]

Minqing Hu and Bing Liu. 2004. Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.

Digital Library

[8]

Brett Kessler, Geoffrey Nunberg, and Hinrich Schütze. 1997. Automatic detection of text genre. In Proceedings of the 35th Conference on Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 32--38.

Digital Library

[9]

S. Kullback and R. A. Leibler. 1951. On information and sufficiency. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 22(1):79--86, March.

[10]

David D. Lewis. 1998. Naive (Bayes) at forty: The independence assumption in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML).

Digital Library

[11]

Wei-Hao Lin, Theresa Wilson, Janyce Wiebe, and Alexander Hauptmann. 2006. Which side are you on? identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels. In Proceedings of Tenth Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL).

Digital Library

[12]

S. Morinaga, K. Yamanishi, K. Tateishi, and T. Fukushima. 2002. Mining product reputations on the web. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.

Digital Library

[13]

Tony Mullen and Nigel Collier. 2004. Sentiment analysis using support vector machines with diverse information sources. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2004).

[14]

T. Nasukawa and J. Yi. 2003. Sentiment analysis: Capturing favorability using natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Capture (K-CAP 2003).

Digital Library

[15]

Bo Pang and Lillian Lee. 2004. A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-2004).

Digital Library

[16]

Bo Pang, Lillian Lee, and Shivakumar Vaithyanathan. 2002. Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2002).

Digital Library

[17]

Ellen Riloff and Janyce Wiebe. 2003. Learning extraction patterns for subjective expressions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2003).

Digital Library

[18]

Ellen Riloff, Janyce Wiebe, and Theresa Wilson. 2003. Learning subjective nouns using extraction pattern bootstrapping. In Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL-2003).

Digital Library

[19]

B. D. Ripley. 1987. Stochastic Simulation. Wiley.

Digital Library

[20]

Roger C. Schank and Robert P. Abelson. 1977. Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: an inquiry into human knowledge structures. Lawrene Erlbaum Associates.

[21]

Fabrizio Sebastiani. 2002. Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Computing Surveys, 34(1):1--47, March.

Digital Library

[22]

Peter Turney and Michael L. Littman. 2003. Measuring praise and criticism: Inference of semantic orientation from association. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 21(4):315--346.

Digital Library

[23]

Peter Verdonk. 2002. Stylistics. Oxford University Press.

[24]

Janyce Wiebe, Theresa Wilson, Rebecca Bruce, Matthew Bell, and Melanie Martin. 2004. Learning subjective language. Computational Linguistics, 30(3).

Digital Library

[25]

Hong Yu and Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou. 2003. Towards answering opinion questions: Separating facts from opinions and identifying the polarity of opinion sentences. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2003).

Digital Library

Cited By

Lokbani A(2017)A New Metric of Validation for Automatic Text Summarization by ExtractionInternational Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications10.4018/IJSITA.20170701028:3(20-40)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/IJSITA.2017070102
Sepehri-Rad HBarbosa D(2015)Identifying Controversial Wikipedia Articles Using Editor Collaboration NetworksACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology10.1145/26300756:1(1-24)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2630075
Bowers CBeale RHendley R(2012)Identifying archetypal perspectives in news articlesProceedings of the 26th Annual BCS Interaction Specialist Group Conference on People and Computers10.5555/2377916.2377961(327-332)Online publication date: 10-Sep-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2377916.2377961
Show More Cited By

Are these documents written from different perspectives?: a test of different perspectives based on statistical distribution divergence
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
2. Hardware
  1. Power and energy
    1. Power estimation and optimization

Recommendations

Documents As Mediating Artifacts in Contemporary IS Development
HICSS '10: Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

In this paper, we analyze the roles of project-related documents as mediating artifacts in contemporary IS acquisition and development. We draw on a range of theoretical concepts to propose four ways in which documents are implicated in IS development ...
Materiality and oral documents
iConference '11: Proceedings of the 2011 iConference

Information professionals focus on artifacts. This focus shows the value information science has placed on materiality or physicality in its efforts to preserve and make artifacts in specific media accessible. But this focus has proven less useful when ...
Documents in Place: Demarcating Places for Collaboration in Healthcare Settings

The notion of place often connotes our understood reality populated with people, practices, meanings, and artifacts. This paper suggests that documents, whether electronic, paper-based, or set in stone, offer important insights into how people establish ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image DL Hosted proceedings

ACL-44: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

July 2006

1214 pages

Publisher

Association for Computational Linguistics

United States

Publication History

Published: 17 July 2006

Qualifiers

Article

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 85 of 443 submissions, 19%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

12
Total Citations
View Citations
441
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)33
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)16

Reflects downloads up to 14 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Lokbani A(2017)A New Metric of Validation for Automatic Text Summarization by ExtractionInternational Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications10.4018/IJSITA.20170701028:3(20-40)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/IJSITA.2017070102
Sepehri-Rad HBarbosa D(2015)Identifying Controversial Wikipedia Articles Using Editor Collaboration NetworksACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology10.1145/26300756:1(1-24)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2630075
Bowers CBeale RHendley R(2012)Identifying archetypal perspectives in news articlesProceedings of the 26th Annual BCS Interaction Specialist Group Conference on People and Computers10.5555/2377916.2377961(327-332)Online publication date: 10-Sep-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2377916.2377961
Gokalp SDavulcu HMille AGandon FMisselis JRabinovich MStaab S(2012)Partisan scaleProceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web10.1145/2187980.2188046(349-352)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2187980.2188046
Fang YSi LSomasundaram NYu ZAdar ETeevan JAgichtein EMaarek Y(2012)Mining contrastive opinions on political texts using cross-perspective topic modelProceedings of the fifth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining10.1145/2124295.2124306(63-72)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2124295.2124306
Tikves SGokalp STemkit MBanerjee SYe JDavulcu H(2012)Perspective Analysis for Online DebatesProceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2012)10.1109/ASONAM.2012.161(898-905)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ASONAM.2012.161
Agarwal DChen BPang BMerlo PBarzilay RJohnson M(2011)Personalized recommendation of user comments via factor modelsProceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing10.5555/2145432.2145499(571-582)Online publication date: 27-Jul-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2145432.2145499
Klebanov BBeigman EDiermeier D(2010)Vocabulary choice as an indicator of perspectiveProceedings of the ACL 2010 Conference Short Papers10.5555/1858842.1858889(253-257)Online publication date: 11-Jul-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1858842.1858889
Nguyen DMayfield ERosé CMelville PLeskovec JProvost F(2010)An analysis of perspectives in interactive settingsProceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics10.1145/1964858.1964865(44-52)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1964858.1964865
Oh AShrobe HWhite MNakatsu CMcDonald D(2008)Generating baseball summaries from multiple perspectives by reordering contentProceedings of the Fifth International Natural Language Generation Conference10.5555/1708322.1708355(173-176)Online publication date: 12-Jun-2008
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1708322.1708355
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents