Showing 1–21 of 21 results for author: Moreo, A

Quantification using Permutation-Invariant Networks based on Histograms

Authors: Olaya Pérez-Mon, Alejandro Moreo, Juan José del Coz, Pablo González

Abstract: Quantification, also known as class prevalence estimation, is the supervised learning task in which a model is trained to predict the prevalence of each class in a given bag of examples. This paper investigates the application of deep neural networks to tasks of quantification in scenarios where it is possible to apply a symmetric supervised approach that eliminates the need for classification as… ▽ More Quantification, also known as class prevalence estimation, is the supervised learning task in which a model is trained to predict the prevalence of each class in a given bag of examples. This paper investigates the application of deep neural networks to tasks of quantification in scenarios where it is possible to apply a symmetric supervised approach that eliminates the need for classification as an intermediary step, directly addressing the quantification problem. Additionally, it discusses existing permutation-invariant layers designed for set processing and assesses their suitability for quantification. In light of our analysis, we propose HistNetQ, a novel neural architecture that relies on a permutation-invariant representation based on histograms that is specially suited for quantification problems. Our experiments carried out in the only quantification competition held to date, show that HistNetQ outperforms other deep neural architectures devised for set processing, as well as the state-of-the-art quantification methods. Furthermore, HistNetQ offers two significant advantages over traditional quantification methods: i) it does not require the labels of the training examples but only the prevalence values of a collection of training bags, making it applicable to new scenarios; and ii) it is able to optimize any custom quantification-oriented loss function. △ Less

Submitted 22 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Forging the Forger: An Attempt to Improve Authorship Verification via Data Augmentation

Authors: Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo

Abstract: Authorship Verification (AV) is a text classification task concerned with inferring whether a candidate text has been written by one specific author or by someone else. It has been shown that many AV systems are vulnerable to adversarial attacks, where a malicious author actively tries to fool the classifier by either concealing their writing style, or by imitating the style of another author. In… ▽ More Authorship Verification (AV) is a text classification task concerned with inferring whether a candidate text has been written by one specific author or by someone else. It has been shown that many AV systems are vulnerable to adversarial attacks, where a malicious author actively tries to fool the classifier by either concealing their writing style, or by imitating the style of another author. In this paper, we investigate the potential benefits of augmenting the classifier training set with (negative) synthetic examples. These synthetic examples are generated to imitate the style of the author of interest. We analyze the improvements in classifier prediction that this augmentation brings to bear in the task of AV in an adversarial setting. In particular, we experiment with three different generator architectures (one based on Recurrent Neural Networks, another based on small-scale transformers, and another based on the popular GPT model) and with two training strategies (one inspired by standard Language Models, and another inspired by Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Networks). We evaluate our hypothesis on five datasets (three of which have been specifically collected to represent an adversarial setting) and using two learning algorithms for the AV classifier (Support Vector Machines and Convolutional Neural Networks). This experimentation has yielded negative results, revealing that, although our methodology proves effective in many adversarial settings, its benefits are too sporadic for a pragmatical application. △ Less

Submitted 17 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Kernel Density Estimation for Multiclass Quantification

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Pablo González, Juan José del Coz

Abstract: Several disciplines, like the social sciences, epidemiology, sentiment analysis, or market research, are interested in knowing the distribution of the classes in a population rather than the individual labels of the members thereof. Quantification is the supervised machine learning task concerned with obtaining accurate predictors of class prevalence, and to do so particularly in the presence of l… ▽ More Several disciplines, like the social sciences, epidemiology, sentiment analysis, or market research, are interested in knowing the distribution of the classes in a population rather than the individual labels of the members thereof. Quantification is the supervised machine learning task concerned with obtaining accurate predictors of class prevalence, and to do so particularly in the presence of label shift. The distribution-matching (DM) approaches represent one of the most important families among the quantification methods that have been proposed in the literature so far. Current DM approaches model the involved populations by means of histograms of posterior probabilities. In this paper, we argue that their application to the multiclass setting is suboptimal since the histograms become class-specific, thus missing the opportunity to model inter-class information that may exist in the data. We propose a new representation mechanism based on multivariate densities that we model via kernel density estimation (KDE). The experiments we have carried out show our method, dubbed KDEy, yields superior quantification performance with respect to previous DM approaches. We also investigate the KDE-based representation within the maximum likelihood framework and show KDEy often shows superior performance with respect to the expectation-maximization method for quantification, arguably the strongest contender in the quantification arena to date. △ Less

Submitted 2 January, 2024; v1 submitted 31 December, 2023; originally announced January 2024.

Comments: fixed broken references to appendices

Explainable Authorship Identification in Cultural Heritage Applications: Analysis of a New Perspective

Authors: Mattia Setzu, Silvia Corbara, Anna Monreale, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: While a substantial amount of work has recently been devoted to enhance the performance of computational Authorship Identification (AId) systems, little to no attention has been paid to endowing AId systems with the ability to explain the reasons behind their predictions. This lacking substantially hinders the practical employment of AId methodologies, since the predictions returned by such system… ▽ More While a substantial amount of work has recently been devoted to enhance the performance of computational Authorship Identification (AId) systems, little to no attention has been paid to endowing AId systems with the ability to explain the reasons behind their predictions. This lacking substantially hinders the practical employment of AId methodologies, since the predictions returned by such systems are hardly useful unless they are supported with suitable explanations. In this paper, we explore the applicability of existing general-purpose eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to AId, with a special focus on explanations addressed to scholars working in cultural heritage. In particular, we assess the relative merits of three different types of XAI techniques (feature ranking, probing, factuals and counterfactual selection) on three different AId tasks (authorship attribution, authorship verification, same-authorship verification) by running experiments on real AId data. Our analysis shows that, while these techniques make important first steps towards explainable Authorship Identification, more work remains to be done in order to provide tools that can be profitably integrated in the workflows of scholars. △ Less

Submitted 3 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Regularization-Based Methods for Ordinal Quantification

Authors: Mirko Bunse, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani, Martin Senz

Abstract: Quantification, i.e., the task of training predictors of the class prevalence values in sets of unlabeled data items, has received increased attention in recent years. However, most quantification research has concentrated on developing algorithms for binary and multiclass problems in which the classes are not ordered. Here, we study the ordinal case, i.e., the case in which a total order is defin… ▽ More Quantification, i.e., the task of training predictors of the class prevalence values in sets of unlabeled data items, has received increased attention in recent years. However, most quantification research has concentrated on developing algorithms for binary and multiclass problems in which the classes are not ordered. Here, we study the ordinal case, i.e., the case in which a total order is defined on the set of n>2 classes. We give three main contributions to this field. First, we create and make available two datasets for ordinal quantification (OQ) research that overcome the inadequacies of the previously available ones. Second, we experimentally compare the most important OQ algorithms proposed in the literature so far. To this end, we bring together algorithms proposed by authors from very different research fields, such as data mining and astrophysics, who were unaware of each others' developments. Third, we propose a novel class of regularized OQ algorithms, which outperforms existing algorithms in our experiments. The key to this gain in performance is that our regularization prevents ordinally implausible estimates, assuming that ordinal distributions tend to be smooth in practice. We informally verify this assumption for several real-world applications. △ Less

Submitted 13 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Comments: 45 pages

Binary Quantification and Dataset Shift: An Experimental Investigation

Authors: Pablo González, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Quantification is the supervised learning task that consists of training predictors of the class prevalence values of sets of unlabelled data, and is of special interest when the labelled data on which the predictor has been trained and the unlabelled data are not IID, i.e., suffer from dataset shift. To date, quantification methods have mostly been tested only on a special case of dataset shift,… ▽ More Quantification is the supervised learning task that consists of training predictors of the class prevalence values of sets of unlabelled data, and is of special interest when the labelled data on which the predictor has been trained and the unlabelled data are not IID, i.e., suffer from dataset shift. To date, quantification methods have mostly been tested only on a special case of dataset shift, i.e., prior probability shift; the relationship between quantification and other types of dataset shift remains, by and large, unexplored. In this work we carry out an experimental analysis of how current quantification algorithms behave under different types of dataset shift, in order to identify limitations of current approaches and hopefully pave the way for the development of more broadly applicable methods. We do this by proposing a fine-grained taxonomy of types of dataset shift, by establishing protocols for the generation of datasets affected by these types of shift, and by testing existing quantification methods on the datasets thus generated. One finding that results from this investigation is that many existing quantification methods that had been found robust to prior probability shift are not necessarily robust to other types of dataset shift. A second finding is that no existing quantification method seems to be robust enough to dealing with all the types of dataset shift we simulate in our experiments. The code needed to reproduce all our experiments is publicly available at https://github.com/pglez82/quant_datasetshift. △ Less

Submitted 6 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Same or Different? Diff-Vectors for Authorship Analysis

Authors: Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: We investigate the effects on authorship identification tasks of a fundamental shift in how to conceive the vectorial representations of documents that are given as input to a supervised learner. In ``classic'' authorship analysis a feature vector represents a document, the value of a feature represents (an increasing function of) the relative frequency of the feature in the document, and the clas… ▽ More We investigate the effects on authorship identification tasks of a fundamental shift in how to conceive the vectorial representations of documents that are given as input to a supervised learner. In ``classic'' authorship analysis a feature vector represents a document, the value of a feature represents (an increasing function of) the relative frequency of the feature in the document, and the class label represents the author of the document. We instead investigate the situation in which a feature vector represents an unordered pair of documents, the value of a feature represents the absolute difference in the relative frequencies (or increasing functions thereof) of the feature in the two documents, and the class label indicates whether the two documents are from the same author or not. This latter (learner-independent) type of representation has been occasionally used before, but has never been studied systematically. We argue that it is advantageous, and that in some cases (e.g., authorship verification) it provides a much larger quantity of information to the training process than the standard representation. The experiments that we carry out on several publicly available datasets (among which one that we here make available for the first time) show that feature vectors representing pairs of documents (that we here call Diff-Vectors) bring about systematic improvements in the effectiveness of authorship identification tasks, and especially so when training data are scarce (as it is often the case in real-life authorship identification scenarios). Our experiments tackle same-author verification, authorship verification, and closed-set authorship attribution; while DVs are naturally geared for solving the 1st, we also provide two novel methods for solving the 2nd and 3rd that use a solver for the 1st as a building block. △ Less

Submitted 24 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.

Multi-Label Quantification

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Manuel Francisco, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Quantification, variously called "supervised prevalence estimation" or "learning to quantify", is the supervised learning task of generating predictors of the relative frequencies (a.k.a. "prevalence values") of the classes of interest in unlabelled data samples. While many quantification methods have been proposed in the past for binary problems and, to a lesser extent, single-label multiclass pr… ▽ More Quantification, variously called "supervised prevalence estimation" or "learning to quantify", is the supervised learning task of generating predictors of the relative frequencies (a.k.a. "prevalence values") of the classes of interest in unlabelled data samples. While many quantification methods have been proposed in the past for binary problems and, to a lesser extent, single-label multiclass problems, the multi-label setting (i.e., the scenario in which the classes of interest are not mutually exclusive) remains by and large unexplored. A straightforward solution to the multi-label quantification problem could simply consist of recasting the problem as a set of independent binary quantification problems. Such a solution is simple but naïve, since the independence assumption upon which it rests is, in most cases, not satisfied. In these cases, knowing the relative frequency of one class could be of help in determining the prevalence of other related classes. We propose the first truly multi-label quantification methods, i.e., methods for inferring estimators of class prevalence values that strive to leverage the stochastic dependencies among the classes of interest in order to predict their relative frequencies more accurately. We show empirical evidence that natively multi-label solutions outperform the naïve approaches by a large margin. The code to reproduce all our experiments is available online. △ Less

Submitted 15 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

LeQua@CLEF2022: Learning to Quantify

Authors: Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: LeQua 2022 is a new lab for the evaluation of methods for "learning to quantify" in textual datasets, i.e., for training predictors of the relative frequencies of the classes of interest in sets of unlabelled textual documents. While these predictions could be easily achieved by first classifying all documents via a text classifier and then counting the numbers of documents assigned to the classes… ▽ More LeQua 2022 is a new lab for the evaluation of methods for "learning to quantify" in textual datasets, i.e., for training predictors of the relative frequencies of the classes of interest in sets of unlabelled textual documents. While these predictions could be easily achieved by first classifying all documents via a text classifier and then counting the numbers of documents assigned to the classes, a growing body of literature has shown this approach to be suboptimal, and has proposed better methods. The goal of this lab is to provide a setting for the comparative evaluation of methods for learning to quantify, both in the binary setting and in the single-label multiclass setting. For each such setting we provide data either in ready-made vector form or in raw document form. △ Less

Submitted 11 December, 2021; v1 submitted 22 November, 2021; originally announced November 2021.

Generalized Funnelling: Ensemble Learning and Heterogeneous Document Embeddings for Cross-Lingual Text Classification

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Pedrotti, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: \emph{Funnelling} (Fun) is a recently proposed method for cross-lingual text classification (CLTC) based on a two-tier learning ensemble for heterogeneous transfer learning (HTL). In this ensemble method, 1st-tier classifiers, each working on a different and language-dependent feature space, return a vector of calibrated posterior probabilities (with one dimension for each class) for each document… ▽ More \emph{Funnelling} (Fun) is a recently proposed method for cross-lingual text classification (CLTC) based on a two-tier learning ensemble for heterogeneous transfer learning (HTL). In this ensemble method, 1st-tier classifiers, each working on a different and language-dependent feature space, return a vector of calibrated posterior probabilities (with one dimension for each class) for each document, and the final classification decision is taken by a metaclassifier that uses this vector as its input. The metaclassifier can thus exploit class-class correlations, and this (among other things) gives Fun an edge over CLTC systems in which these correlations cannot be brought to bear. In this paper we describe \emph{Generalized Funnelling} (gFun), a generalization of Fun consisting of an HTL architecture in which 1st-tier components can be arbitrary \emph{view-generating functions}, i.e., language-dependent functions that each produce a language-independent representation ("view") of the (monolingual) document. We describe an instance of gFun in which the metaclassifier receives as input a vector of calibrated posterior probabilities (as in Fun) aggregated to other embedded representations that embody other types of correlations, such as word-class correlations (as encoded by \emph{Word-Class Embeddings}), word-word correlations (as encoded by \emph{Multilingual Unsupervised or Supervised Embeddings}), and word-context correlations (as encoded by \emph{multilingual BERT}). We show that this instance of \textsc{gFun} substantially improves over Fun and over state-of-the-art baselines, by reporting experimental results obtained on two large, standard datasets for multilingual multilabel text classification. Our code that implements gFun is publicly available. △ Less

Submitted 7 February, 2022; v1 submitted 17 September, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Syllabic Quantity Patterns as Rhythmic Features for Latin Authorship Attribution

Authors: Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: It is well known that, within the Latin production of written text, peculiar metric schemes were followed not only in poetic compositions, but also in many prose works. Such metric patterns were based on so-called syllabic quantity, i.e., on the length of the involved syllables, and there is substantial evidence suggesting that certain authors had a preference for certain metric patterns over othe… ▽ More It is well known that, within the Latin production of written text, peculiar metric schemes were followed not only in poetic compositions, but also in many prose works. Such metric patterns were based on so-called syllabic quantity, i.e., on the length of the involved syllables, and there is substantial evidence suggesting that certain authors had a preference for certain metric patterns over others. In this research we investigate the possibility to employ syllabic quantity as a base for deriving rhythmic features for the task of computational authorship attribution of Latin prose texts. We test the impact of these features on the authorship attribution task when combined with other topic-agnostic features. Our experiments, carried out on three different datasets, using two different machine learning methods, show that rhythmic features based on syllabic quantity are beneficial in discriminating among Latin prose authors. △ Less

Submitted 27 October, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Measuring Fairness Under Unawareness of Sensitive Attributes: A Quantification-Based Approach

Authors: Alessandro Fabris, Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Algorithms and models are increasingly deployed to inform decisions about people, inevitably affecting their lives. As a consequence, those in charge of developing these models must carefully evaluate their impact on different groups of people and favour group fairness, that is, ensure that groups determined by sensitive demographic attributes, such as race or sex, are not treated unjustly. To ach… ▽ More Algorithms and models are increasingly deployed to inform decisions about people, inevitably affecting their lives. As a consequence, those in charge of developing these models must carefully evaluate their impact on different groups of people and favour group fairness, that is, ensure that groups determined by sensitive demographic attributes, such as race or sex, are not treated unjustly. To achieve this goal, the availability (awareness) of these demographic attributes to those evaluating the impact of these models is fundamental. Unfortunately, collecting and storing these attributes is often in conflict with industry practices and legislation on data minimisation and privacy. For this reason, it can be hard to measure the group fairness of trained models, even from within the companies developing them. In this work, we tackle the problem of measuring group fairness under unawareness of sensitive attributes, by using techniques from quantification, a supervised learning task concerned with directly providing group-level prevalence estimates (rather than individual-level class labels). We show that quantification approaches are particularly suited to tackle the fairness-under-unawareness problem, as they are robust to inevitable distribution shifts while at the same time decoupling the (desirable) objective of measuring group fairness from the (undesirable) side effect of allowing the inference of sensitive attributes of individuals. More in detail, we show that fairness under unawareness can be cast as a quantification problem and solved with proven methods from the quantification literature. We show that these methods outperform previous approaches to measure demographic parity in five experimental protocols, corresponding to important challenges that complicate the estimation of classifier fairness under unawareness. △ Less

Submitted 27 March, 2023; v1 submitted 17 September, 2021; originally announced September 2021.

Comments: Accepted for publication in the Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Journal ref: Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 76 (2023) 1117-1180

QuaPy: A Python-Based Framework for Quantification

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: QuaPy is an open-source framework for performing quantification (a.k.a. supervised prevalence estimation), written in Python. Quantification is the task of training quantifiers via supervised learning, where a quantifier is a predictor that estimates the relative frequencies (a.k.a. prevalence values) of the classes of interest in a sample of unlabelled data. While quantification can be trivially… ▽ More QuaPy is an open-source framework for performing quantification (a.k.a. supervised prevalence estimation), written in Python. Quantification is the task of training quantifiers via supervised learning, where a quantifier is a predictor that estimates the relative frequencies (a.k.a. prevalence values) of the classes of interest in a sample of unlabelled data. While quantification can be trivially performed by applying a standard classifier to each unlabelled data item and counting how many data items have been assigned to each class, it has been shown that this "classify and count" method is outperformed by methods specifically designed for quantification. QuaPy provides implementations of a number of baseline methods and advanced quantification methods, of routines for quantification-oriented model selection, of several broadly accepted evaluation measures, and of robust evaluation protocols routinely used in the field. QuaPy also makes available datasets commonly used for testing quantifiers, and offers visualization tools for facilitating the analysis and interpretation of the results. The software is open-source and publicly available under a BSD-3 licence via https://github.com/HLT-ISTI/QuaPy, and can be installed via pip (https://pypi.org/project/QuaPy/) △ Less

Submitted 18 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Tweet Sentiment Quantification: An Experimental Re-Evaluation

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Sentiment quantification is the task of training, by means of supervised learning, estimators of the relative frequency (also called ``prevalence'') of sentiment-related classes (such as \textsf{Positive}, \textsf{Neutral}, \textsf{Negative}) in a sample of unlabelled texts. This task is especially important when these texts are tweets, since the final goal of most sentiment classification efforts… ▽ More Sentiment quantification is the task of training, by means of supervised learning, estimators of the relative frequency (also called ``prevalence'') of sentiment-related classes (such as \textsf{Positive}, \textsf{Neutral}, \textsf{Negative}) in a sample of unlabelled texts. This task is especially important when these texts are tweets, since the final goal of most sentiment classification efforts carried out on Twitter data is actually quantification (and not the classification of individual tweets). It is well-known that solving quantification by means of ``classify and count'' (i.e., by classifying all unlabelled items by means of a standard classifier and counting the items that have been assigned to a given class) is less than optimal in terms of accuracy, and that more accurate quantification methods exist. Gao and Sebastiani (2016) carried out a systematic comparison of quantification methods on the task of tweet sentiment quantification. In hindsight, we observe that the experimental protocol followed in that work was weak, and that the reliability of the conclusions that were drawn from the results is thus questionable. We now re-evaluate those quantification methods (plus a few more modern ones) on exactly the same same datasets, this time following a now consolidated and much more robust experimental protocol (which also involves simulating the presence, in the test data, of class prevalence values very different from those of the training set). This experimental protocol (even without counting the newly added methods) involves a number of experiments 5,775 times larger than that of the original study. The results of our experiments are dramatically different from those obtained by Gao and Sebastiani, and they provide a different, much more solid understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of different sentiment quantification methods. △ Less

Submitted 17 September, 2021; v1 submitted 4 November, 2020; originally announced November 2020.

Re-Assessing the "Classify and Count" Quantification Method

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Learning to quantify (a.k.a.\ quantification) is a task concerned with training unbiased estimators of class prevalence via supervised learning. This task originated with the observation that "Classify and Count" (CC), the trivial method of obtaining class prevalence estimates, is often a biased estimator, and thus delivers suboptimal quantification accuracy; following this observation, several me… ▽ More Learning to quantify (a.k.a.\ quantification) is a task concerned with training unbiased estimators of class prevalence via supervised learning. This task originated with the observation that "Classify and Count" (CC), the trivial method of obtaining class prevalence estimates, is often a biased estimator, and thus delivers suboptimal quantification accuracy; following this observation, several methods for learning to quantify have been proposed that have been shown to outperform CC. In this work we contend that previous works have failed to use properly optimised versions of CC. We thus reassess the real merits of CC (and its variants), and argue that, while still inferior to some cutting-edge methods, they deliver near-state-of-the-art accuracy once (a) hyperparameter optimisation is performed, and (b) this optimisation is performed by using a true quantification loss instead of a standard classification-based loss. Experiments on three publicly available binary sentiment classification datasets support these conclusions. △ Less

Submitted 22 January, 2021; v1 submitted 4 November, 2020; originally announced November 2020.

Comments: This is the final version of the paper, identical to the one that is going to appear on the Proceedings of the 43rd European Conference on Information Retrieval (ECIR 2021)

Journal ref: Final version published in Proceedings of the 43rd European Conference on Information Retrieval (ECIR 2021), Lucca, IT, 2021, pp. 75-91

MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit: Two Datasets for the Computational Authorship Analysis of Medieval Latin Texts

Authors: Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani, Mirko Tavoni

Abstract: We present and make available MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit, two datasets of medieval Latin texts to be used in research on computational authorship analysis. MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit consist of 294 and 30 curated texts, respectively, labelled by author; MedLatinEpi texts are of epistolary nature, while MedLatinLit texts consist of literary comments and treatises about various subjects. As such,… ▽ More We present and make available MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit, two datasets of medieval Latin texts to be used in research on computational authorship analysis. MedLatinEpi and MedLatinLit consist of 294 and 30 curated texts, respectively, labelled by author; MedLatinEpi texts are of epistolary nature, while MedLatinLit texts consist of literary comments and treatises about various subjects. As such, these two datasets lend themselves to supporting research in authorship analysis tasks, such as authorship attribution, authorship verification, or same-author verification. Along with the datasets we provide experimental results, obtained on these datasets, for the authorship verification task, i.e., the task of predicting whether a text of unknown authorship was written by a candidate author or not. We also make available the source code of the authorship verification system we have used, thus allowing our experiments to be reproduced, and to be used as baselines, by other researchers. We also describe the application of the above authorship verification system, using these datasets as training data, for investigating the authorship of two medieval epistles whose authorship has been disputed by scholars. △ Less

Submitted 11 September, 2021; v1 submitted 22 June, 2020; originally announced June 2020.

Journal ref: Forthcoming in the ACM Journal of Computing and Cultural Heritage, 2021

Word-Class Embeddings for Multiclass Text Classification

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Pre-trained word embeddings encode general word semantics and lexical regularities of natural language, and have proven useful across many NLP tasks, including word sense disambiguation, machine translation, and sentiment analysis, to name a few. In supervised tasks such as multiclass text classification (the focus of this article) it seems appealing to enhance word representations with ad-hoc emb… ▽ More Pre-trained word embeddings encode general word semantics and lexical regularities of natural language, and have proven useful across many NLP tasks, including word sense disambiguation, machine translation, and sentiment analysis, to name a few. In supervised tasks such as multiclass text classification (the focus of this article) it seems appealing to enhance word representations with ad-hoc embeddings that encode task-specific information. We propose (supervised) word-class embeddings (WCEs), and show that, when concatenated to (unsupervised) pre-trained word embeddings, they substantially facilitate the training of deep-learning models in multiclass classification by topic. We show empirical evidence that WCEs yield a consistent improvement in multiclass classification accuracy, using four popular neural architectures and six widely used and publicly available datasets for multiclass text classification. Our code that implements WCEs is publicly available at https://github.com/AlexMoreo/word-class-embeddings △ Less

Submitted 26 November, 2019; originally announced November 2019.

Journal ref: Final version published in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 35(3), 911-963, 2021

Cross-Lingual Sentiment Quantification

Authors: Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: \emph{Sentiment Quantification} (i.e., the task of estimating the relative frequency of sentiment-related classes -- such as \textsf{Positive} and \textsf{Negative} -- in a set of unlabelled documents) is an important topic in sentiment analysis, as the study of sentiment-related quantities and trends across a population is often of higher interest than the analysis of individual instances. In thi… ▽ More \emph{Sentiment Quantification} (i.e., the task of estimating the relative frequency of sentiment-related classes -- such as \textsf{Positive} and \textsf{Negative} -- in a set of unlabelled documents) is an important topic in sentiment analysis, as the study of sentiment-related quantities and trends across a population is often of higher interest than the analysis of individual instances. In this work we propose a method for \emph{Cross-Lingual Sentiment Quantification}, the task of performing sentiment quantification when training documents are available for a source language $\mathcal{S}$ but not for the target language $\mathcal{T}$ for which sentiment quantification needs to be performed. Cross-lingual sentiment quantification (and cross-lingual \emph{text} quantification in general) has never been discussed before in the literature; we establish baseline results for the binary case by combining state-of-the-art quantification methods with methods capable of generating cross-lingual vectorial representations of the source and target documents involved. We present experimental results obtained on publicly available datasets for cross-lingual sentiment classification; the results show that the presented methods can perform cross-lingual sentiment quantification with a surprising level of accuracy. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2020; v1 submitted 16 April, 2019; originally announced April 2019.

Comments: Identical to previous version, but for the abstract, which is now identical to the one in the published version

Journal ref: Final version published in IEEE Intelligent Systems 35(3):106-114, 2020

Building Automated Survey Coders via Interactive Machine Learning

Authors: Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Software systems trained via machine learning to automatically classify open-ended answers (a.k.a. verbatims) are by now a reality. Still, their adoption in the survey coding industry has been less widespread than it might have been. Among the factors that have hindered a more massive takeup of this technology are the effort involved in manually coding a sufficient amount of training data, the fac… ▽ More Software systems trained via machine learning to automatically classify open-ended answers (a.k.a. verbatims) are by now a reality. Still, their adoption in the survey coding industry has been less widespread than it might have been. Among the factors that have hindered a more massive takeup of this technology are the effort involved in manually coding a sufficient amount of training data, the fact that small studies do not seem to justify this effort, and the fact that the process needs to be repeated anew when brand new coding tasks arise. In this paper we will argue for an approach to building verbatim classifiers that we will call "Interactive Learning", and that addresses all the above problems. We will show that, for the same amount of training effort, interactive learning delivers much better coding accuracy than standard "non-interactive" learning. This is especially true when the amount of data we are willing to manually code is small, which makes this approach attractive also for small-scale studies. Interactive learning also lends itself to reusing previously trained classifiers for dealing with new (albeit related) coding tasks. Interactive learning also integrates better in the daily workflow of the survey specialist, and delivers a better user experience overall. △ Less

Submitted 28 March, 2019; originally announced March 2019.

Comments: To appear in the International Journal of Market Research

Journal ref: Final version published in International Journal of Market Research, 61(4):408-429, 2019

Funnelling: A New Ensemble Method for Heterogeneous Transfer Learning and its Application to Cross-Lingual Text Classification

Authors: Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: Cross-lingual Text Classification (CLC) consists of automatically classifying, according to a common set C of classes, documents each written in one of a set of languages L, and doing so more accurately than when naively classifying each document via its corresponding language-specific classifier. In order to obtain an increase in the classification accuracy for a given language, the system thus n… ▽ More Cross-lingual Text Classification (CLC) consists of automatically classifying, according to a common set C of classes, documents each written in one of a set of languages L, and doing so more accurately than when naively classifying each document via its corresponding language-specific classifier. In order to obtain an increase in the classification accuracy for a given language, the system thus needs to also leverage the training examples written in the other languages. We tackle multilabel CLC via funnelling, a new ensemble learning method that we propose here. Funnelling consists of generating a two-tier classification system where all documents, irrespectively of language, are classified by the same (2nd-tier) classifier. For this classifier all documents are represented in a common, language-independent feature space consisting of the posterior probabilities generated by 1st-tier, language-dependent classifiers. This allows the classification of all test documents, of any language, to benefit from the information present in all training documents, of any language. We present substantial experiments, run on publicly available multilingual text collections, in which funnelling is shown to significantly outperform a number of state-of-the-art baselines. All code and datasets (in vector form) are made publicly available. △ Less

Submitted 16 April, 2019; v1 submitted 31 January, 2019; originally announced January 2019.

Comments: 28 pages, 4 figures

Journal ref: Final version published in ACM Transactions on Information Systems 37(3), 37:1-37:30, 2019

Revisiting Distributional Correspondence Indexing: A Python Reimplementation and New Experiments

Authors: Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Abstract: This paper introduces PyDCI, a new implementation of Distributional Correspondence Indexing (DCI) written in Python. DCI is a transfer learning method for cross-domain and cross-lingual text classification for which we had provided an implementation (here called JaDCI) built on top of JaTeCS, a Java framework for text classification. PyDCI is a stand-alone version of DCI that exploits scikit-learn… ▽ More This paper introduces PyDCI, a new implementation of Distributional Correspondence Indexing (DCI) written in Python. DCI is a transfer learning method for cross-domain and cross-lingual text classification for which we had provided an implementation (here called JaDCI) built on top of JaTeCS, a Java framework for text classification. PyDCI is a stand-alone version of DCI that exploits scikit-learn and the SciPy stack. We here report on new experiments that we have carried out in order to test PyDCI, and in which we use as baselines new high-performing methods that have appeared after DCI was originally proposed. These experiments show that, thanks to a few subtle ways in which we have improved DCI, PyDCI outperforms both JaDCI and the above-mentioned high-performing methods, and delivers the best known results on the two popular benchmarks on which we had tested DCI, i.e., MultiDomainSentiment (a.k.a. MDS -- for cross-domain adaptation) and Webis-CLS-10 (for cross-lingual adaptation). PyDCI, together with the code allowing to replicate our experiments, is available at https://github.com/AlexMoreo/pydci . △ Less

Submitted 19 October, 2018; originally announced October 2018.