Should I visit this place? Inclusion and Exclusion Phrase Mining from Reviews
Authors:
Omkar Gurjar,
Manish Gupta
Abstract:
Although several automatic itinerary generation services have made travel planning easy, often times travellers find themselves in unique situations where they cannot make the best out of their trip. Visitors differ in terms of many factors such as suffering from a disability, being of a particular dietary preference, travelling with a toddler, etc. While most tourist spots are universal, others m…
▽ More
Although several automatic itinerary generation services have made travel planning easy, often times travellers find themselves in unique situations where they cannot make the best out of their trip. Visitors differ in terms of many factors such as suffering from a disability, being of a particular dietary preference, travelling with a toddler, etc. While most tourist spots are universal, others may not be inclusive for all. In this paper, we focus on the problem of mining inclusion and exclusion phrases associated with 11 such factors, from reviews related to a tourist spot. While existing work on tourism data mining mainly focuses on structured extraction of trip related information, personalized sentiment analysis, and automatic itinerary generation, to the best of our knowledge this is the first work on inclusion/exclusion phrase mining from tourism reviews. Using a dataset of 2000 reviews related to 1000 tourist spots, our broad level classifier provides a binary overlap F1 of $\sim$80 and $\sim$82 to classify a phrase as inclusion or exclusion respectively. Further, our inclusion/exclusion classifier provides an F1 of $\sim$98 and $\sim$97 for 11-class inclusion and exclusion classification respectively. We believe that our work can significantly improve the quality of an automatic itinerary generation service.
△ Less
Submitted 18 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
Catching up with trends: The changing landscape of political discussions on twitter in 2014 and 2019
Authors:
Avinash Tulasi,
Kanay Gupta,
Omkar Gurjar,
Sathvik Sanjeev Buggana,
Paras Mehan,
Arun Balaji Buduru,
Ponnurangam Kumaraguru
Abstract:
The advent of 4G increased the usage of internet in India, which took a huge number of discussions online. Online Social Networks (OSNs) are the center of these discussions. During elections, political discussions constitute a significant portion of the trending topics on these networks. Politicians and political parties catch up with these trends, and social media then becomes a part of their pub…
▽ More
The advent of 4G increased the usage of internet in India, which took a huge number of discussions online. Online Social Networks (OSNs) are the center of these discussions. During elections, political discussions constitute a significant portion of the trending topics on these networks. Politicians and political parties catch up with these trends, and social media then becomes a part of their publicity agenda. We cannot ignore this trend in any election, be it the U.S, Germany, France, or India. Twitter is a major platform where we observe these trends. In this work, we examine the magnitude of political discussions on twitter by contrasting the platform usage on levels like gender, political party, and geography, in 2014 and 2019 Indian General Elections. In a further attempt to understand the strategies followed by political parties, we compare twitter usage by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Indian National Congress (INC) in 2019 General Elections in terms of how efficiently they make use of the platform. We specifically analyze the handles of politicians who emerged victorious. We then proceed to compare political handles held by frontmen of BJP and INC: Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) and Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) using parameters like "following", "tweeting habits", "sources used to tweet", along with text analysis of tweets. With this work, we also introduce a rich dataset covering a majority of tweets made during the election period in 2014 and 2019.
△ Less
Submitted 18 September, 2019; v1 submitted 16 September, 2019;
originally announced September 2019.
