4.6 Article

Learning Stylometric Representations for Authorship Analysis

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
卷 49, 期 1, 页码 107-121

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TCYB.2017.2766189

关键词

Authorship analysis (AA); computational linguistics; representation learning; text mining

资金

  1. NSERC [356065-2013]
  2. Canada Research Chairs Program [950-230623]
  3. Research Incentive through Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, UAE [RIF13059]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Authorship analysis (AA) is the study of unveiling the hidden properties of authors from textual data. It extracts an author's identity and sociolinguistic characteristics based on the reflected writing styles in the text. The process is essential for various areas, such as cybercrime investigation, psycholinguistics, political socialization, etc. However, most of the previous techniques critically depend on the manual feature engineering process. Consequently, the choice of feature set has been shown to be scenario-or dataset-dependent. In this paper, to mimic the human sentence composition process using a neural network approach, we propose to incorporate different categories of linguistic features into distributed representation of words in order to learn simultaneously the writing style representations based on unlabeled texts for AA. In particular, the proposed models allow topical, lexical, syntactical, and character-level feature vectors of each document to be extracted as stylometrics. We evaluate the performance of our approach on the problems of authorship characterization, authorship identification and authorship verification with the Twitter, blog, review, novel, and essay datasets. The experiments suggest that our proposed text representation outperforms the static stylometrics, dynamic n-grams, latent Dirichlet allocation, latent semantic analysis, distributed memory model of paragraph vectors, distributed bag of words version of paragraph vector, word2vec representations, and other baselines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据