arXiv subjects

Alejandro Moreo

Publications and source records attributed to Alejandro Moreo.

30 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2022

Generalized Funnelling: Ensemble Learning and Heterogeneous Document Embeddings for Cross-Lingual Text Classification

\emph{Funnelling} (Fun) is a recently proposed method for cross-lingual text classification (CLTC) based on a two-tier learning ensemble for heterogeneous transfer learning (HTL). In this ensemble method, 1st-tier classifiers, each working on a different and language-dependent feature space, return a vector of calibrated posterior probabilities (with one dimension for each class) for each document, and the final classification decision is taken by a metaclassifier that uses this vector as its input. The metaclassifier can thus exploit class-class correlations, and this (among other things) gives Fun an edge over CLTC systems in which these correlations cannot be brought to bear. In this paper we describe \emph{Generalized Funnelling} (gFun), a generalization of Fun consisting of an HTL architecture in which 1st-tier components can be arbitrary \emph{view-generating functions}, i.e., language-dependent functions that each produce a language-independent representation ("view") of the (monolingual) document. We describe an instance of gFun in which the metaclassifier receives as input a vector of calibrated posterior probabilities (as in Fun) aggregated to other embedded representations that embody other types of correlations, such as word-class correlations (as encoded by \emph{Word-Class Embeddings}), word-word correlations (as encoded by \emph{Multilingual Unsupervised or Supervised Embeddings}), and word-context correlations (as encoded by \emph{multilingual BERT}). We show that this instance of \textsc{gFun} substantially improves over Fun and over state-of-the-art baselines, by reporting experimental results obtained on two large, standard datasets for multilingual multilabel text classification. Our code that implements gFun is publicly available.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

LeQua@CLEF2022: Learning to Quantify

LeQua 2022 is a new lab for the evaluation of methods for "learning to quantify" in textual datasets, i.e., for training predictors of the relative frequencies of the classes of interest in sets of unlabelled textual documents. While these predictions could be easily achieved by first classifying all documents via a text classifier and then counting the numbers of documents assigned to the classes, a growing body of literature has shown this approach to be suboptimal, and has proposed better methods. The goal of this lab is to provide a setting for the comparative evaluation of methods for learning to quantify, both in the binary setting and in the single-label multiclass setting. For each such setting we provide data either in ready-made vector form or in raw document form.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

Syllabic Quantity Patterns as Rhythmic Features for Latin Authorship Attribution

It is well known that, within the Latin production of written text, peculiar metric schemes were followed not only in poetic compositions, but also in many prose works. Such metric patterns were based on so-called syllabic quantity, i.e., on the length of the involved syllables, and there is substantial evidence suggesting that certain authors had a preference for certain metric patterns over others. In this research we investigate the possibility to employ syllabic quantity as a base for deriving rhythmic features for the task of computational authorship attribution of Latin prose texts. We test the impact of these features on the authorship attribution task when combined with other topic-agnostic features. Our experiments, carried out on three different datasets, using two different machine learning methods, show that rhythmic features based on syllabic quantity are beneficial in discriminating among Latin prose authors.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

Tweet Sentiment Quantification: An Experimental Re-Evaluation

Sentiment quantification is the task of training, by means of supervised learning, estimators of the relative frequency (also called ``prevalence'') of sentiment-related classes (such as \textsf{Positive}, \textsf{Neutral}, \textsf{Negative}) in a sample of unlabelled texts. This task is especially important when these texts are tweets, since the final goal of most sentiment classification efforts carried out on Twitter data is actually quantification (and not the classification of individual tweets). It is well-known that solving quantification by means of ``classify and count'' (i.e., by classifying all unlabelled items by means of a standard classifier and counting the items that have been assigned to a given class) is less than optimal in terms of accuracy, and that more accurate quantification methods exist. Gao and Sebastiani (2016) 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 was weak, and that the reliability of the conclusions that were drawn from the results is thus questionable. We now re-evaluate those quantification methods (plus a few more modern ones) on exactly the same same datasets, this time following a now consolidated and much more robust experimental protocol (which also involves simulating the presence, in the test data, of class prevalence values very different from those of the training set). This experimental protocol (even without counting the newly added methods) involves a number of experiments 5,775 times larger than that of the original study. The results of our experiments are dramatically different from those obtained by Gao and Sebastiani, and they provide a different, much more solid understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of different sentiment quantification methods.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit: Two Datasets for the Computational Authorship Analysis of Medieval Latin Texts

We present and make available MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit, two datasets of medieval Latin texts to be used in research on computational authorship analysis. MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit consist of 294 and 30 curated texts, respectively, labelled by author; MedLatinEpi texts are of epistolary nature, while MedLatinLit texts consist 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. Along with the datasets we provide experimental results, obtained on these datasets, for the authorship verification task, i.e., the task of predicting whether a text of unknown authorship was written by a candidate author or not. We also make available the source code of the authorship verification system we have used, thus allowing our experiments to be reproduced, and to be used as baselines, by other researchers. We also describe the application of the above authorship verification system, using these datasets as training data, for investigating the authorship of two medieval epistles whose authorship has been disputed by scholars.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

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/)

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

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.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2020

Cross-Lingual Sentiment Quantification

\emph{Sentiment Quantification} (i.e., the task of estimating the relative frequency of sentiment-related classes -- such as \textsf{Positive} and \textsf{Negative} -- in a set of unlabelled documents) is an important topic in sentiment analysis, as the study of sentiment-related quantities and trends across a population is often of higher interest than the analysis of individual instances. In this work we propose a method for \emph{Cross-Lingual Sentiment Quantification}, the task of performing sentiment quantification when training documents are available for a source language $\mathcal{S}$ but not for the target language $\mathcal{T}$ for which sentiment quantification needs to be performed. Cross-lingual sentiment quantification (and cross-lingual \emph{text} quantification in general) 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 cross-lingual sentiment quantification with a surprising level of accuracy.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2019

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

cs.LG↗

arXiv2019

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.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2019

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.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2018

Revisiting Distributional Correspondence Indexing: A Python Reimplementation and New Experiments

This paper introduces PyDCI, a new implementation of Distributional Correspondence Indexing (DCI) written in Python. DCI is a transfer learning method for cross-domain and cross-lingual text classification for which we had provided an implementation (here called JaDCI) built on top of JaTeCS, a Java framework for text classification. PyDCI is a stand-alone version of DCI that exploits scikit-learn and the SciPy stack. We here report on new experiments that we have carried out in order to test PyDCI, and in which we use as baselines new high-performing methods that have appeared after DCI was originally proposed. These experiments show that, thanks to a few subtle ways in which we have improved DCI, PyDCI outperforms both JaDCI and the above-mentioned high-performing methods, and delivers the best known results on the two popular benchmarks on which we had tested DCI, i.e., MultiDomainSentiment (a.k.a. MDS -- for cross-domain adaptation) and Webis-CLS-10 (for cross-lingual adaptation). PyDCI, together with the code allowing to replicate our experiments, is available at https://github.com/AlexMoreo/pydci .

cs.CL↗