skip to main content
10.1145/3129676.3129702acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesracsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Deep-MSP: Morphological Sentence Pattern Recognition based on ConvNet

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 September 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Sentiment analysis aims to observe and summarize a person's opinions or emotional states through textual data. Despite the demands of sentiment analysis methods for analyzing social media data, fundamental challenges still remained because user-generated data is unstructured, unlabeled, and "noisy". The morphological sentence pattern (MSP) model, an aspect-based lexicon building method, is proposed for dealing with the problems of the transitional sentiment analysis by recognizing the "aspect-expression" in a sentence. However, there are limitations on this model. Firstly, since the MSP model is based on the pattern matching, the sentences cannot be analyzed when the pattern does not exist in the lexicon. Secondly, the patterns should be continuously updated to maintain a high level of accuracy. In this paper, to compensate for the limitations of the MSP model, we proposed Deep-MSP, a deep learning approach based on multiple convolutional neural networks (ConvNet or CNN), designed to recognize whether or not the target part-of-speech has potential to be the aspect-expression from not only existing patterns but also new patterns.

References

  1. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. 2015. Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1097--1105).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Redmon, J., Divvala, S., Girshick, R., & Farhadi, A. 2016. You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 779--788). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Kim, Y. 2014. Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5882.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Dos Santos, C. N., & Gatti, M. 2014. Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Sentiment Analysis of Short Texts. In COLING (pp. 69--78).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Glorot, X., & Bengio, Y. 2010. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In Aistats (Vol. 9, pp. 249--256).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., & Haffner, P. 1998. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(11), 2278--2324. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Simard, P. Y., Steinkraus, D., & Platt, J. C. 2003. Best Practices for Convolutional Neural Networks Applied to Visual Document Analysis. In ICDAR (Vol. 3, pp. 958--962).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hu, B., Lu, Z., Li, H., & Chen, Q. 2014. Convolutional neural network architectures for matching natural language sentences. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 2042--2050).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kalchbrenner, N., Grefenstette, E., & Blunsom, P. 2014. A convolutional neural network for modelling sentences. arXiv preprint arXiv:1404.2188.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Han, Y., Kim, Y., & Jang, I. 2016. A Method for Extracting Lexicon for Sentiment Analysis Based on Morphological Sentence Patterns. In Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (pp. 85--101). Springer International Publishing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Manning, C. D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J. R., Bethard, S., & McClosky, D. 2014. The stanford corenlp natural language processing toolkit. In ACL (System Demonstrations) (pp. 55--60). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. O'Connor, B., Balasubramanyan, R., Routledge, B. R., & Smith, N. A. 2010. From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. ICWSM, 11(122-129), 1--2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Wilson, T., Hoffmann, P., Somasundaran, S., Kessler, J., Wiebe, J., Choi, Y., ... & Patwardhan, S. 2005. OpinionFinder: A system for subjectivity analysis. In Proceedings of hlt/emnlp on interactive demonstrations (pp. 34--35). Association for Computational Linguistics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Bross, J., & Ehrig, H. 2013. Automatic construction of domain and aspect specific sentiment lexicons for customer review mining. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Conference on information & knowledge management (pp. 1077--1086). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Thet, T. T., Na, J. C., & Khoo, C. S. 2010. Aspect-based sentiment analysis of movie reviews on discussion boards. Journal of information science, 36(6), 823--848. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Wogenstein, F., Drescher, J., Reinel, D., Rill, S., & Scheidt, J. 2013. Evaluation of an algorithm for aspect-based opinion mining using a lexicon-based approach. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Issues of Sentiment Discovery and Opinion Mining (p. 5). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Ahmed, E., Jones, M., & Marks, T. K. 2015. An improved deep learning architecture for person re-identification. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 3908--3916). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Srivastava, N., Hinton, G. E., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Salakhutdinov, R. 2014. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15(1), 1929--1958.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Ioffe, S., & Szegedy, C. 2015. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Bengio, Y., Ducharme, R., Vincent, P., & Jauvin, C. 2003. A neural probabilistic language model. Journal of machine learning research, 3(Feb), 1137--1155.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Glorot, X., Bordes, A., & Bengio, Y. 2011. Deep Sparse Rectifier Neural Networks. In Aistats (Vol. 15, No. 106, p. 275).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Tieleman, T., & Hinton, G. 2012. Lecture 6.5-rmsprop: Divide the gradient by a running average of its recent magnitude. COURSERA: Neural networks for machine learning, 4(2).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Deep-MSP: Morphological Sentence Pattern Recognition based on ConvNet

      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
        RACS '17: Proceedings of the International Conference on Research in Adaptive and Convergent Systems
        September 2017
        324 pages
        ISBN:9781450350273
        DOI:10.1145/3129676

        Copyright © 2017 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: 20 September 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        RACS '17 Paper Acceptance Rate48of207submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,581submissions,25%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader