Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 2015
DOI: 10.18653/v1/d15-1311
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Classifying Tweet Level Judgements of Rumours in Social Media

Abstract: Social media is a rich source of rumours and corresponding community reactions. Rumours reflect different characteristics, some shared and some individual. We formulate the problem of classifying tweet level judgements of rumours as a supervised learning task. Both supervised and unsupervised domain adaptation are considered, in which tweets from a rumour are classified on the basis of other annotated rumours. We demonstrate how multi-task learning helps achieve good results on rumours from the 2011 England ri… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
53
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
53
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, there is an increasing body of work [24,15,10,11,17,34] looking into stance classification of tweets discussing rumours, categorising tweets as supporting, denying or questioning the rumour. The approach has been to train a classifier from a labelled set of tweets to categorise the stance observed in new tweets discussing rumours; however, these authors do not deal with nonrumours, assuming instead that the input to the classifier is already cleaned up to include only tweets related to rumours.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, there is an increasing body of work [24,15,10,11,17,34] looking into stance classification of tweets discussing rumours, categorising tweets as supporting, denying or questioning the rumour. The approach has been to train a classifier from a labelled set of tweets to categorise the stance observed in new tweets discussing rumours; however, these authors do not deal with nonrumours, assuming instead that the input to the classifier is already cleaned up to include only tweets related to rumours.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We choose this method due to interpretability of results, similar to recent work on occupational class classification (Preotiuc-Pietro et al, 2015;Lukasik et al, 2015).…”
Section: Rumor Detection Via Kernel Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We consider the Leave One Out (LOO) setting, introduced by Lukasik et al (2015a), where for each rumour R i ∈ D we construct the test set equal to R i and the training set equal to D \ R i . The final performance scores we report in the paper are averaged across all rumours.…”
Section: Problem Definitionmentioning
confidence: 99%