Advertisement

An Approach to Improving the Classification of the New York Times Annotated Corpus

  • Elena Mozzherina
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 394)

Abstract

The New York Times Annotated Corpus contains over 1.5 million of manually tagged articles. It could become a useful source for evaluation of algorithms for documents clustering. Since documents have been labeled over twenty years, it is argued that the classification may contains errors due to a possible dissent between experts and the necessity to add tags over time. This paper presents an approach to improving the classification quality by using assigned tags as a starting point.

It is assumed that tags can be described by a set of features. These features are selected based on the value of mutual information between the tag and stems from documents with it. An algorithm for reassigning tags in case the document does not contain features of its labels is presented. Experiments were performed on about ninety thousand articles published by the New York Times in 2005. Results of applying the algorithm to the collection are discussed.

Keywords

document classification classification improvement classification evaluation mutual information 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sandhaus, E.: The New York Times annotated corpus. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Torkkola, K.: Discriminative features for text document classification. Pattern Analysis and Applications 6(4), 301–308 (2003)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Text Retrieval Conference, http://trec.nist.gov/
  5. 5.
    Manning, C., Raghavan, P., Schtze, H.: Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge University Press, NY (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weiss, M.S., Indurkhya, N., Zhang, T., Damerau, F.J.: Text Mining: Predictive Methods for Analyzing Unstructured Information. Springer Science+Business Media, Inc., NY (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neto, J.L., Santos, A.D., Kaestner, C.A.A., Freitas, A.A.: Document clustering and text summarization. In: International Conference Practical Applications of Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 41–55 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bakus, J., Kamel, M.S., Carey, T.: Extraction of text phrases using hierarchical grammar. In: Cohen, R., Spencer, B. (eds.) Canadian AI 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2338, pp. 319–324. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Steinbach, M., Karypis, G., Kumar, V.: A comparison of document clustering techniques. In: KDD Workshop on Text Mining (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Larsen, B., Aone, C.: Fast and effective text mining using linear-time document clustering. In: ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 16–22 (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Steinbach, M., Karypis, G., Kumar, V.: A comparison of document clustering techniques. In: KDD Workshop on Text Mining (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, Y., Li, Z., Xiong, H., Gao, X., Wue, J.: Understanding of internal clustering validation measures. In: IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 911–916 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Mozzherina
    • 1
  1. 1.Saint Petersburg State UniversitySt.PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations