Pith sign in

REVIEW

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2210.07381 v1 pith:MHSVRY4F submitted 2022-10-13 cs.CL

Frustratingly Easy Sentiment Analysis of Text Streams: Generating High-Quality Emotion Arcs Using Emotion Lexicons

classification cs.CL
keywords emotionarcsgeneratedqualitygeneratingmethodsautomaticallylexo
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Automatically generated emotion arcs -- that capture how an individual or a population feels over time -- are widely used in industry and research. However, there is little work on evaluating the generated arcs. This is in part due to the difficulty of establishing the true (gold) emotion arc. Our work, for the first time, systematically and quantitatively evaluates automatically generated emotion arcs. We also compare two common ways of generating emotion arcs: Machine-Learning (ML) models and Lexicon-Only (LexO) methods. Using a number of diverse datasets, we systematically study the relationship between the quality of an emotion lexicon and the quality of the emotion arc that can be generated with it. We also study the relationship between the quality of an instance-level emotion detection system (say from an ML model) and the quality of emotion arcs that can be generated with it. We show that despite being markedly poor at instance level, LexO methods are highly accurate at generating emotion arcs by aggregating information from hundreds of instances. This has wide-spread implications for commercial development, as well as research in psychology, public health, digital humanities, etc. that values simple interpretable methods and disprefers the need for domain-specific training data, programming expertise, and high-carbon-footprint models.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.