Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTowards Evaluation of Cultural-scale Claims in Light of Topic Model Sampling Effects
67
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Jaimie Murdock
Publication date
2015
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Cultural-scale models of full text documents are prone to over-interpretation by researchers making unintentionally strong socio-linguistic claims (Pechenick et al., 2015) without recognizing that even large digital libraries are merely samples of all the books ever produced. In this study, we test the sensitivity of the topic models to the sampling process by taking random samples of books in the Hathi Trust Digital Library from different areas of the Library of Congress Classification Outline. For each classification area, we train several topic models over the entire class with different random seeds, generating a set of spanning models. Then, we train topic models on random samples of books from the classification area, generating a set of sample models. Finally, we perform a topic alignment between each pair of models by computing the Jensen-Shannon distance (JSD) between the word probability distributions for each topic. We take two measures on each model alignment: alignment distance and topic overlap. We find that sample models with a large sample size typically have an alignment distance that falls in the range of the alignment distance between spanning models. Unsurprisingly, as sample size increases, alignment distance decreases. We also find that the topic overlap increases as sample size increases. However, the decomposition of these measures by sample size differs by number of topics and by classification area. We speculate that these measures could be used to find classes which have a common canon discussed among all books in the area, as shown by high topic overlap and low alignment distance even in small sample sizes.
rate research
Read More
The surge in the number of books published makes the manual evaluation methods difficult to efficiently evaluate books. The use of books citations and alternative evaluation metrics can assist manual evaluation and reduce the cost of evaluation. However, most existing evaluation research was based on a single evaluation source with coarse-grained analysis, which may obtain incomprehensive or one-sided evaluation results of book impact. Meanwhile, relying on a single resource for book assessment may lead to the risk that the evaluation results cannot be obtained due to the lack of the evaluation data, especially for newly published books. Hence, this paper measured book impact based on an evaluation system constructed by integrating multiple evaluation sources. Specifically, we conducted finer-grained mining on the multiple evaluation sources, including books internal evaluation resources and external evaluation resources. Various technologies (e.g. topic extraction, sentiment analysis, text classification) were used to extract corresponding evaluation metrics from the internal and external evaluation resources. Then, Expert evaluation combined with analytic hierarchy process was used to integrate the evaluation metrics and construct a book impact evaluation system. Finally, the reliability of the evaluation system was verified by comparing with the results of expert evaluation, detailed and diversified evaluation results were then obtained. The experimental results reveal that differential evaluation resources can measure the books impacts from different dimensions, and the integration of multiple evaluation data can assess books more comprehensively. Meanwhile, the book impact evaluation system can provide personalized evaluation results according to the users evaluation purposes. In addition, the disciplinary differences should be considered for assessing books impacts.
Topic models are widely used unsupervised models capable of learning topics - weighted lists of words and documents - from large collections of text documents. When topic models are used for discovery of topics in text collections, a question that arises naturally is how well the model-induced topics correspond to topics of interest to the analyst. In this paper we revisit and extend a so far neglected approach to topic model evaluation based on measuring topic coverage - computationally matching model topics with a set of reference topics that models are expected to uncover. The approach is well suited for analyzing models performance in topic discovery and for large-scale analysis of both topic models and measures of model quality. We propose new measures of coverage and evaluate, in a series of experiments, different types of topic models on two distinct text domains for which interest for topic discovery exists. The experiments include evaluation of model quality, analysis of coverage of distinct topic categories, and the analysis of the relationship between coverage and other methods of topic model evaluation. The paper contributes a new supervised measure of coverage, and the first unsupervised measure of coverage. The supervised measure achieves topic matching accuracy close to human agreement. The unsupervised measure correlates highly with the supervised one (Spearmans $rho geq 0.95$). Other contributions include insights into both topic models and different methods of model evaluation, and the datasets and code for facilitating future research on topic coverage.
The purpose of this paper is to apply and evaluate the bibliometric method Bradfordizing for information retrieval (IR) experiments. Bradfordizing is used for generating core document sets for subject-specific questions and to reorder result sets from distributed searches. The method will be applied and tested in a controlled scenario of scientific literature databases from social and political sciences, economics, psychology and medical science (SOLIS, SoLit, USB Koeln Opac, CSA Sociological Abstracts, World Affairs Online, Psyndex and Medline) and 164 standardized topics. An evaluation of the method and its effects is carried out in two laboratory-based information retrieval experiments (CLEF and KoMoHe) using a controlled document corpus and human relevance assessments. The results show that Bradfordizing is a very robust method for re-ranking the main document types (journal articles and monographs) in todays digital libraries (DL). The IR tests show that relevance distributions after re-ranking improve at a significant level if articles in the core are compared with articles in the succeeding zones. The items in the core are significantly more often assessed as relevant, than items in zone 2 (z2) or zone 3 (z3). The improvements between the zones are statistically significant based on the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the paired T-Test.
We present a framework that allows users to incorporate the semantics of their domain knowledge for topic model refinement while remaining model-agnostic. Our approach enables users to (1) understand the semantic space of the model, (2) identify regions of potential conflicts and problems, and (3) readjust the semantic relation of concepts based on their understanding, directly influencing the topic modeling. These tasks are supported by an interactive visual analytics workspace that uses word-embedding projections to define concept regions which can then be refined. The user-refined concepts are independent of a particular document collection and can be transferred to related corpora. All user interactions within the concept space directly affect the semantic relations of the underlying vector space model, which, in turn, change the topic modeling. In addition to direct manipulation, our system guides the users decision-making process through recommended interactions that point out potential improvements. This targeted refinement aims at minimizing the feedback required for an efficient human-in-the-loop process. We confirm the improvements achieved through our approach in two user studies that show topic model quality improvements through our visual knowledge externalization and learning process.
Conversational recommender systems (CRS) aim to recommend high-quality items to users through interactive conversations. To develop an effective CRS, the support of high-quality datasets is essential. Existing CRS datasets mainly focus on immediate requests from users, while lack proactive guidance to the recommendation scenario. In this paper, we contribute a new CRS dataset named textbf{TG-ReDial} (textbf{Re}commendation through textbf{T}opic-textbf{G}uided textbf{Dial}og). Our dataset has two major features. First, it incorporates topic threads to enforce natural semantic transitions towards the recommendation scenario. Second, it is created in a semi-automatic way, hence human annotation is more reasonable and controllable. Based on TG-ReDial, we present the task of topic-guided conversational recommendation, and propose an effective approach to this task. Extensive experiments have demonstrated the effectiveness of our approach on three sub-tasks, namely topic prediction, item recommendation and response generation. TG-ReDial is available at https://github.com/RUCAIBox/TG-ReDial.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
