Current methods for assessing the impact of authors and scientific media employ tools such as H-Index, Co-Citation and PageRank. These tools are primarily based on citation counting, which considers all citations to be equal. This type of methods can produce perverse incentives to publish controversial or incomplete papers, as mixed or negative reviews often generate larger citation counts and better indexes, regardless of whether the citations were critical or exerted minimal influence on the citing document. Passing citations that are employed to establish background, which do not have a real impact on the citing paper, are common in scientific literature. However, these citations have equal weight in impact evaluations. Notable researchers have emphasized the need to correct this situation by developing estimation methods that consider the different roles of quotations in citing papers. To accomplish this type of evaluation, a context citation analysis should be applied to determine the nature of the citations. We propose that citations should be categorized using four dimensions – FUNCTION, POLARITY, ASPECTS and INFLUENCE – as these dimensions provide adequate information that can be employed toward the generation of a qualitative method to measure the impact of a given publication in a citing paper. In this paper, we used interchangeably the words influence and impact. We present a method for obtaining this information using our proposed classification scheme and manually annotated corpus, which is marked with meaningful keywords and labels to help identify the characteristics or properties that constitute what we call ASPECTS. We develop a classification scheme which considers purpose definition shared by previous works. Our contribution is to abstract purpose classes from several other schemes and divide a complex structure in more manageable parts, to attain a simple system that combines low granularity dimensions but nevertheless produces a fine-grained classification. For annotators, the classification process is simple because in a first step, the coders distinguish only four primary classes, and in a second pass, they add the information contained in ASPECTS keyword and labels to obtain the more specific functions. This way, we gain a high granularity labeling that gives enough information about the citations to characterize and classify them, and we achieve this detailed coding with a straightforward process where the level of human error could be minimized.

We describe a scaffolding approach to the task of coreference resolution that incrementally combines statistical classifiers, each designed for a particular mention type, with rule-based models (for sub-tasks well-matched to determinism). We motivate our design by an oracle-based analysis of errors in a rule-based coreference resolution system, showing that rule-based approaches are poorly suited to tasks that require a large lexical feature space, such as resolving pronominal and common-noun mentions. Our approach combines many advantages: it incrementally builds clusters integrating joint information about entities, uses rules for deterministic phenomena, and integrates rich lexical, syntactic, and semantic features with random forest classifiers well-suited to modeling the complex feature interactions that are known to characterize the coreference task. We demonstrate that all these decisions are important. The resulting system achieves 63.2 F1 on the CoNLL-2012 shared task dataset, outperforming the rule-based starting point by over seven F1 points. Similarly, our system outperforms an equivalent sieve-based approach that relies on logistic regression classifiers instead of random forests by over four F1 points. Lastly, we show that by changing the coreference resolution system from relying on constituent-based syntax to using dependency syntax, which can be generated in linear time, we achieve a runtime speedup of 550 per cent without considerable loss of accuracy.

There has been a trend for publications to report better and better numbers, but less and less insight. The literature is turning into a giant leaderboard, where publication depends on numbers and little else (such as insight and explanation). It is considered a feature that machine learning has become so powerful (and so opaque) that it is no longer necessary (or even relevant) to talk about how it works. Insight is not only not required any more, but perhaps, insight is no longer even considered desirable.

Transparency is good and opacity is bad. A recent best seller, Weapons of Math Destruction, is concerned that big data (and WMDs) increase inequality and threaten democracy largely because of opacity. Algorithms are being used to make lots of important decisions like who gets a loan and who goes to jail. If we tell the machine to maximize an objective function like making money, it will do exactly that, for better and for worse. Who is responsible for the consequences? Does it make it ok for machines to do bad things if no one knows what’s happening and why, including those of us who created the machines?

This paper presents two novel ideas of improving the Machine Translation (MT) quality by applying the word-level quality prediction for the second pass of decoding. In this manner, the word scores estimated by word confidence estimation systems help to reconsider the MT hypotheses for selecting a better candidate rather than accepting the current sub-optimal one. In the first attempt, the selection scope is limited to the MT N-best list, in which our proposed re-ranking features are combined with those of the decoder for re-scoring. Then, the search space is enlarged over the entire search graph, storing many more hypotheses generated during the first pass of decoding. Over all paths containing words of the N-best list, we propose an algorithm to strengthen or weaken them depending on the estimated word quality. In both methods, the highest score candidate after the search becomes the official translation. The results obtained show that both approaches advance the MT quality over the one-pass baseline, and the search graph re-decoding achieves more gains (in BLEU score) than N-best List Re-ranking method.

This paper discusses the issue of human variation in natural language referring expression generation. We introduce a model of content selection that takes speaker-dependent information into account to produce descriptions that closely resemble those produced by each individual, as seen in a number of reference corpora. Results show that our speaker-dependent referring expression generation model outperforms alternatives that do not take human variation into account, or which do so less extensively, and suggest that the use of machine-learning methods may be an ideal approach to mimic complex referential behaviour.

Newspaper text can be broadly divided in the classes ‘opinion’ (editorials, commentary, letters to the editor) and ‘neutral’ (reports). We describe a classification system for performing this separation, which uses a set of linguistically motivated features. Working with various English newspaper corpora, we demonstrate that it significantly outperforms bag-of-lemma and PoS-tag models. We conclude that the linguistic features constitute the best method for achieving robustness against change of newspaper or domain.

This paper presents a system developed for detecting sexual predators in online chat conversations using a two-stage classification and behavioral features. A sexual predator is defined as a person who tries to obtain sexual favors in a predatory manner, usually with underage people. The proposed approach uses several text categorization methods and empirical behavioral features developed especially for the task at hand. After investigating various approaches for solving the sexual predator identification problem, we have found that a two-stage classifier achieves the best results. In the first stage, we employ a Support Vector Machine classifier to distinguish conversations having suspicious content from safe online discussions. This is useful as most chat conversations in real life do not contain a sexual predator, therefore it can be viewed as a filtering phase that enables the actual detection of predators to be done only for suspicious chats that contain a sexual predator with a very high degree. In the second stage, we detect which of the users in a suspicious discussion is an actual predator using a Random Forest classifier. The system was tested on the corpus provided by the PAN 2012 workshop organizers and the results are encouraging because, as far as we know, our solution outperforms all previous approaches developed for solving this task.

We live in a post-truth world. It now matters more whether people think something is true than whether something really is true. This is dangerous, and technology is at least partly to blame. So, as technologists, how can we help to fix this?

Natural language processing (NLP) techniques can be used to make inferences about peoples’ mental states from what they write on Facebook, Twitter and other social media. These inferences can then be used to create online pathways to direct people to health information and assistance and also to generate personalized interventions. Regrettably, the computational methods used to collect, process and utilize online writing data, as well as the evaluations of these techniques, are still dispersed in the literature. This paper provides a taxonomy of data sources and techniques that have been used for mental health support and intervention. Specifically, we review how social media and other data sources have been used to detect emotions and identify people who may be in need of psychological assistance; the computational techniques used in labeling and diagnosis; and finally, we discuss ways to generate and personalize mental health interventions. The overarching aim of this scoping review is to highlight areas of research where NLP has been applied in the mental health literature and to help develop a common language that draws together the fields of mental health, human-computer interaction and NLP.