Check the preview of 2nd version of this platform
being developed by the open MLCommons taskforce on automation and reproducibility
as a free, open-source and technology-agnostic on-prem platform.
The Dangerous Myth of the Star System
lib:1a3b40879a7bb4a4 (v1.0.0)
Authors: Andr{\'e} Bittar,Luca Dini,Sigrid Maurel,Mathieu Ruhlmann
Where published: LREC 2014 5
Document: PDF DOI
Abstract URL: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/L14-1309/
In recent years we have observed two parallel trends in computational linguistics research and e-commerce development. On the research side, there has been an increasing interest in algorithms and approaches that are able to capture the polarity of opinions expressed by users on products, institutions and services. On the other hand, almost all big e-commerce and aggregator sites are by now providing users the possibility of writing comments and expressing their appreciation with a numeric score (usually represented as a number of stars). This generates the impression that the work carried out in the research community is made partially useless (at least for economic exploitation) by an evolution in web practices. In this paper we describe an experiment on a large corpus which shows that the score judgments provided by users are often conflicting with the text contained in the opinion, and to such a point that a rule-based opinion mining system can be demonstrated to perform better than the users themselves in ranking their opinions.
Where published: LREC 2014 5
Document: PDF DOI
Abstract URL: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/L14-1309/
In recent years we have observed two parallel trends in computational linguistics research and e-commerce development. On the research side, there has been an increasing interest in algorithms and approaches that are able to capture the polarity of opinions expressed by users on products, institutions and services. On the other hand, almost all big e-commerce and aggregator sites are by now providing users the possibility of writing comments and expressing their appreciation with a numeric score (usually represented as a number of stars). This generates the impression that the work carried out in the research community is made partially useless (at least for economic exploitation) by an evolution in web practices. In this paper we describe an experiment on a large corpus which shows that the score judgments provided by users are often conflicting with the text contained in the opinion, and to such a point that a rule-based opinion mining system can be demonstrated to perform better than the users themselves in ranking their opinions.
Relevant initiatives
Related knowledge about this paper
Reproduced results (crowd-benchmarking and competitions)
Artifact and reproducibility checklists
- ACM/cTuning artifact appendix and reproducibility checklist
- NeurIPS reproducibility checklist
- SIGPLAN's checklist for empirical evaluation
- Collective Knowledge (organizing research projects based on FAIR principles)