QuaPy: A Python-Based Framework for Quantification

QuaPy is an open-source framework for performing quantification (a.k.a. supervised prevalence estimation), written in Python. Quantification is the task of training quantifiers via supervised learning, where a quantifier is a predictor that estimates the relative frequencies (a.k.a. prevalence values) of the classes of interest in a sample of unlabelled data. While quantification can be trivially performed by applying a standard classifier to each unlabelled data item and counting how many data items have been assigned to each class, it has been shown that this "classify and count" method is outperformed by methods specifically designed for quantification. QuaPy provides implementations of a number of baseline methods and advanced quantification methods, of routines for quantification-oriented model selection, of several broadly accepted evaluation measures, and of robust evaluation protocols routinely used in the field. QuaPy also makes available datasets commonly used for testing quantifiers, and offers visualization tools for facilitating the analysis and interpretation of the results. The software is open-source and publicly available under a BSD-3 licence via https://github.com/HLT-ISTI/QuaPy, and can be installed via pip (https://pypi.org/project/QuaPy/)

Re-Assessing the "Classify and Count" Quantification Method

Learning to quantify (a.k.a.\ quantification) is a task concerned with training unbiased estimators of class prevalence via supervised learning. This task originated with the observation that "Classify and Count" (CC), the trivial method of obtaining class prevalence estimates, is often a biased estimator, and thus delivers suboptimal quantification accuracy; following this observation, several methods for learning to quantify have been proposed that have been shown to outperform CC. In this work we contend that previous works have failed to use properly optimised versions of CC. We thus reassess the real merits of CC (and its variants), and argue that, while still inferior to some cutting-edge methods, they deliver near-state-of-the-art accuracy once (a) hyperparameter optimisation is performed, and (b) this optimisation is performed by using a true quantification loss instead of a standard classification-based loss. Experiments on three publicly available binary sentiment classification datasets support these conclusions.

Tweet Sentiment Quantification: An Experimental Re-Evaluation

Sentiment quantification is the task of estimating the relative frequency (or "prevalence") of sentiment-related classes (such as Positive, Neutral, Negative) in a sample of unlabelled texts; this is especially important when these texts are tweets, since most sentiment classification endeavours carried out on Twitter data actually have quantification (and not the classification of individual tweets) as their ultimate goal. It is well-known that solving quantification via "classify and count" (i.e., by classifying all unlabelled items via a standard classifier and counting the items that have been assigned to a given class) is suboptimal in terms of accuracy, and that more accurate quantification methods exist. In 2016, Gao and Sebastiani carried out a systematic comparison of quantification methods on the task of tweet sentiment quantification. In hindsight, we observe that the experimental protocol followed in that work is flawed, and that its results are thus unreliable. We now re-evaluate those quantification methods on the very same datasets, this time following a now consolidated and much more robust experimental protocol, that involves 5775 as many experiments as run in the original study. Our experimentation yields results dramatically different from those obtained by Gao and Sebastiani, and thus provide a different, much more solid understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of different sentiment quantification methods.

MedLatin1 and MedLatin2: Two Datasets for the Computational Authorship Analysis of Medieval Latin Texts

We present and make available MedLatin1 and MedLatin2, two datasets of medieval Latin texts to be used in research on computational authorship analysis. MedLatin1 and MedLatin2 consist of 294 and 30 curated texts, respectively, labelled by author, with MedLatin1 texts being of an epistolary nature and MedLatin2 texts consisting of literary comments and treatises about various subjects. As such, these two datasets lend themselves to supporting research in authorship analysis tasks, such as authorship attribution, authorship verification, or same-author verification.

SemEval-2016 Task 4: Sentiment Analysis in Twitter

This paper discusses the fourth year of the ``Sentiment Analysis in Twitter Task''. SemEval-2016 Task 4 comprises five subtasks, three of which represent a significant departure from previous editions. The first two subtasks are reruns from prior years and ask to predict the overall sentiment, and the sentiment towards a topic in a tweet. The three new subtasks focus on two variants of the basic ``sentiment classification in Twitter'' task. The first variant adopts a five-point scale, which confers an ordinal character to the classification task. The second variant focuses on the correct estimation of the prevalence of each class of interest, a task which has been called quantification in the supervised learning literature. The task continues to be very popular, attracting a total of 43 teams.

Word-Class Embeddings for Multiclass Text Classification

Pre-trained word embeddings encode general word semantics and lexical regularities of natural language, and have proven useful across many NLP tasks, including word sense disambiguation, machine translation, and sentiment analysis, to name a few. In supervised tasks such as multiclass text classification (the focus of this article) it seems appealing to enhance word representations with ad-hoc embeddings that encode task-specific information. We propose (supervised) word-class embeddings (WCEs), and show that, when concatenated to (unsupervised) pre-trained word embeddings, they substantially facilitate the training of deep-learning models in multiclass classification by topic. We show empirical evidence that WCEs yield a consistent improvement in multiclass classification accuracy, using four popular neural architectures and six widely used and publicly available datasets for multiclass text classification. Our code that implements WCEs is publicly available at https://github.com/AlexMoreo/word-class-embeddings

Cross-Lingual Sentiment Quantification

We discuss \emph{Cross-Lingual Text Quantification} (CLTQ), the task of performing text quantification (i.e., estimating the relative frequency $p_{c}(D)$ of all classes $c\in\mathcal{C}$ in a set $D$ of unlabelled documents) when training documents are available for a source language $\mathcal{S}$ but not for the target language $\mathcal{T}$ for which quantification needs to be performed. CLTQ has never been discussed before in the literature; we establish baseline results for the binary case by combining state-of-the-art quantification methods with methods capable of generating cross-lingual vectorial representations of the source and target documents involved. We present experimental results obtained on publicly available datasets for cross-lingual sentiment classification; the results show that the presented methods can perform CLTQ with a surprising level of accuracy.

Funnelling: A New Ensemble Method for Heterogeneous Transfer Learning and its Application to Cross-Lingual Text Classification

Cross-lingual Text Classification (CLC) consists of automatically classifying, according to a common set C of classes, documents each written in one of a set of languages L, and doing so more accurately than when naively classifying each document via its corresponding language-specific classifier. In order to obtain an increase in the classification accuracy for a given language, the system thus needs to also leverage the training examples written in the other languages. We tackle multilabel CLC via funnelling, a new ensemble learning method that we propose here. Funnelling consists of generating a two-tier classification system where all documents, irrespectively of language, are classified by the same (2nd-tier) classifier. For this classifier all documents are represented in a common, language-independent feature space consisting of the posterior probabilities generated by 1st-tier, language-dependent classifiers. This allows the classification of all test documents, of any language, to benefit from the information present in all training documents, of any language. We present substantial experiments, run on publicly available multilingual text collections, in which funnelling is shown to significantly outperform a number of state-of-the-art baselines. All code and datasets (in vector form) are made publicly available.

Building Automated Survey Coders via Interactive Machine Learning

Software systems trained via machine learning to automatically classify open-ended answers (a.k.a. verbatims) are by now a reality. Still, their adoption in the survey coding industry has been less widespread than it might have been. Among the factors that have hindered a more massive takeup of this technology are the effort involved in manually coding a sufficient amount of training data, the fact that small studies do not seem to justify this effort, and the fact that the process needs to be repeated anew when brand new coding tasks arise. In this paper we will argue for an approach to building verbatim classifiers that we will call "Interactive Learning", and that addresses all the above problems. We will show that, for the same amount of training effort, interactive learning delivers much better coding accuracy than standard "non-interactive" learning. This is especially true when the amount of data we are willing to manually code is small, which makes this approach attractive also for small-scale studies. Interactive learning also lends itself to reusing previously trained classifiers for dealing with new (albeit related) coding tasks. Interactive learning also integrates better in the daily workflow of the survey specialist, and delivers a better user experience overall.

Learning to Weight for Text Classification

In information retrieval (IR) and related tasks, term weighting approaches typically consider the frequency of the term in the document and in the collection in order to compute a score reflecting the importance of the term for the document. In tasks characterized by the presence of training data (such as text classification) it seems logical that the term weighting function should take into account the distribution (as estimated from training data) of the term across the classes of interest. Although `supervised term weighting' approaches that use this intuition have been described before, they have failed to show consistent improvements. In this article we analyse the possible reasons for this failure, and call consolidated assumptions into question. Following this criticism we propose a novel supervised term weighting approach that, instead of relying on any predefined formula, learns a term weighting function optimised on the training set of interest; we dub this approach \emph{Learning to Weight} (LTW). The experiments that we run on several well-known benchmarks, and using different learning methods, show that our method outperforms previous term weighting approaches in text classification.