4.7 Article

Document-level sentiment classification: An empirical comparison between SVM and ANN

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 40, 期 2, 页码 621-633

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.059

关键词

Sentiment classification; Opinion mining; Text classification; Artificial Neural Networks; Support Vector Machines; Comparative study

资金

  1. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico, Brazil)
  2. CAPES (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Document-level sentiment classification aims to automate the task of classifying a textual review, which is given on a single topic, as expressing a positive or negative sentiment. In general, supervised methods consist of two stages: (i) extraction/selection of informative features and (ii) classification of reviews by using learning models like Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Naive Bayes (NB). SVM have been extensively and successfully used as a sentiment learning approach while Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) have rarely been considered in comparative studies in the sentiment analysis literature. This paper presents an empirical comparison between SVM and ANN regarding document-level sentiment analysis. We discuss requirements, resulting models and contexts in which both approaches achieve better levels of classification accuracy. We adopt a standard evaluation context with popular supervised methods for feature selection and weighting in a traditional bag-of-words model. Except for some unbalanced data contexts, our experiments indicated that ANN produce superior or at least comparable results to SVM's. Specially on the benchmark dataset of Movies reviews, ANN outperformed SVM by a statistically significant difference, even on the context of unbalanced data. Our results have also confirmed some potential limitations of both models, which have been rarely discussed in the sentiment classification literature, like the computational cost of SVM at the running time and ANN at the training time. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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