skip to main content
10.1145/2939672.2939737acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

EMBERS AutoGSR: Automated Coding of Civil Unrest Events

Published:13 August 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

We describe the EMBERS AutoGSR system that conducts automated coding of civil unrest events from news articles published in multiple languages. The nuts and bolts of the AutoGSR system constitute an ecosystem of filtering, ranking, and recommendation models to determine if an article reports a civil unrest event and, if so, proceed to identify and encode specific characteristics of the civil unrest event such as the when, where, who, and why of the protest. AutoGSR is a deployed system for the past 6 months continually processing data 24x7 in languages such as Spanish, Portuguese, English and encoding civil unrest events in 10 countries of Latin America: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela. We demonstrate the superiority of AutoGSR over both manual approaches and other state-of-the-art encoding systems for civil unrest.

References

  1. E. Boschee, P. Natarajan, and R. Weischedel. Automatic extraction of events from open source text for predictive forecasting. In Handbook of Computational Approaches to Counterterrorism, pages 51--67. Springer, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. C. Cortes and V. Vapnik. Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn., 20(3):273--297, Sept. 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. F. Hogenboom, F. Frasincar, U. Kaymak, and F. De Jong. An overview of event extraction from text. In DeRiVE Workshop at ISWC 2011, volume 779, pages 48--57. Citeseer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. T. Joachims. Text categorization with suport vector machines: Learning with many relevant features. In ECML '98, ECML '98, pages 137--142, London, UK, UK, 1998. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Q. V. Le and T. Mikolov. Distributed representations of sentences and documents. arXiv preprint arXiv:1405.4053, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. K. Leetaru and P. A. Schrodt. Gdelt: Global data on events, location, and tone, 1979--2012. In ISA Annual Convention, volume 2. Citeseer, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T. Mikolov, K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. T. Mikolov, I. Sutskever, K. Chen, G. S. Corrado, and J. Dean. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Advances in neural information processing systems, pages 3111--3119, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. K. Nigam, A. McCallum, S. Thrun, and T. Mitchell. Learning to classify text from labeled and unlabeled documents. In AAAI '98, AAAI '98/IAAI '98, pages 792--799, Menlo Park, CA, USA, 1998. American Association for Artificial Intelligence. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K. Nigam, A. K. McCallum, S. Thrun, and T. Mitchell. Text classification from labeled and unlabeled documents using em. Mach. Learn., 39(2--3):103--134, May 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. S. P. O'brien. Crisis early warning and decision support: Contemporary approaches and thoughts on future research. International Studies Review, 12(1):87--104, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. S. Osinski and D. Weiss. A concept-driven algorithm for clustering search results. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(3):48--54, May 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. N. Ramakrishnan and P. Butler et. al. 'beating the news' with embers: Forecasting civil unrest using open source indicators. In KDD '14, KDD '14, pages 1799--1808, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. L. Ramshaw, E. Boschee, M. Freedman, J. MacBride, R. Weischedel, and A. Zamanian. Serif language processing effective trainable language understanding. Handbook of Natural Language Processing and Machine Translation: DARPA Global Autonomous Language Exploitation, pages 636--644, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. P. A. Schrodt. Tabari: Textual analysis by augmented replacement instructions. Dept. of Political Science, University of Kansas, Blake Hall, Version 0.7. 3B3, pages 1--137, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. P. A. Schrodt. Cameo: Conflict and mediation event observations event and actor codebook. Pennsylvania State University, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. EMBERS AutoGSR: Automated Coding of Civil Unrest Events

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      KDD '16: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining
      August 2016
      2176 pages
      ISBN:9781450342322
      DOI:10.1145/2939672

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 13 August 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      KDD '16 Paper Acceptance Rate66of1,115submissions,6%Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

      Upcoming Conference

      KDD '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader