Fabrizio Sebastiani

Pablo González, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Alejandro Moreo, Manuel Francisco, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Barbara Berti, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Native language identification (NLI) is the task of training (via supervised machine learning) a classifier that guesses the native language of the author of a text. This task has been extensively researched in the last decade, and the performance of NLI systems has steadily improved over the years. We focus on a different facet of the NLI task, i.e., that of analysing the internals of an NLI classifier trained by an \emph{explainable} machine learning algorithm, in order to obtain explanations of its classification decisions, with the ultimate goal of gaining insight into which linguistic phenomena ``give a speaker's native language away''. We use this perspective in order to tackle both NLI and a (much less researched) companion task, i.e., guessing whether a text has been written by a native or a non-native speaker. Using three datasets of different provenance (two datasets of English learners' essays and a dataset of social media posts), we investigate which kind of linguistic traits (lexical, morphological, syntactic, and statistical) are most effective for solving our two tasks, namely, are most indicative of a speaker's L1. We also present two case studies, one on Spanish and one on Italian learners of English, in which we analyse individual linguistic traits that the classifiers have singled out as most important for spotting these L1s. Overall, our study shows that the use of explainable machine learning can be a valuable tool for th

Mattia Setzu, Silvia Corbara, Anna Monreale et al.

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.

Mirko Bunse, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani et al.

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.

Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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/)

Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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

Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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 .

Benedetta Tessa, Alejandro Moreo, Stefano Cresci et al.

Accurately estimating how users respond to moderation interventions is paramount for developing effective and user-centred moderation strategies. However, this requires a clear understanding of which user characteristics are associated with different behavioural responses, which is the goal of this work. We investigate the informativeness of 753 socio-behavioural, linguistic, relational, and psychological features, in predicting the behavioural changes of 16.8K users affected by a major moderation intervention on Reddit. To reach this goal, we frame the problem in terms of "quantification", a task well-suited to estimating shifts in aggregate user behaviour. We then apply a greedy feature selection strategy with the double goal of (i) identifying the features that are most predictive of changes in user activity, toxicity, and participation diversity, and (ii) estimating their importance. Our results allow identifying a small set of features that are consistently informative across all tasks, and determining that many others are either task-specific or of limited utility altogether. We also find that predictive performance varies according to the task, with changes in activity and toxicity being easier to estimate than changes in diversity. Overall, our results pave the way for the development of accurate systems that predict user reactions to moderation interventions. Furthermore, our findings highlight the complexity of post-moderation user behaviour, and indicate that effective moderation should be tailored not only to user traits but also to the specific objective of the intervention.

Lorenzo Volpi, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Transductive learning is a supervised machine learning task in which, unlike in traditional inductive learning, the unlabelled data that require labelling are a finite set and are available at training time. Similarly to inductive learning contexts, transductive learning contexts may be affected by dataset shift, i.e., may be such that the IID assumption does not hold. We here propose a method, tailored to transductive classification contexts, for performing model selection (i.e., hyperparameter optimisation) when the data exhibit prior probability shift, an important type of dataset shift typical of anti-causal learning problems. In our proposed method the hyperparameters can be optimised directly on the unlabelled data to which the trained classifier must be applied; this is unlike traditional model selection methods, that are based on performing cross-validation on the labelled training data. We provide experimental results that show the benefits brought about by our method.

Alessio Micheli, Alejandro Moreo, Marco Podda et al.

Network quantification (NQ) is the problem of estimating the proportions of nodes belonging to each class in subsets of unlabelled graph nodes. When prior probability shift is at play, this task cannot be effectively addressed by first classifying the nodes and then counting the class predictions. In addition, unlike non-relational quantification, NQ demands enhanced flexibility in order to capture a broad range of connectivity patterns, resilience to the challenge of heterophily, and scalability to large networks. In order to meet these stringent requirements, we introduce XNQ, a novel method that synergizes the flexibility and efficiency of the unsupervised node embeddings computed by randomized recursive Graph Neural Networks, with an Expectation-Maximization algorithm that provides a robust quantification-aware adjustment to the output probabilities of a calibrated node classifier. In an extensive evaluation, in which we also validate the design choices underpinning XNQ through comprehensive ablation experiments, we find that XNQ consistently and significantly improves on the best network quantification methods to date, thereby setting the new state of the art for this challenging task. XNQ also provides a training speed-up of up to 10x-100x over other methods based on graph learning.

Martina Leocata, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

The Questio de aqua et terra is a cosmological treatise traditionally attributed to Dante Alighieri. However, the authenticity of this text is controversial, due to discrepancies with Dante's established works and to the absence of contemporary references. This study investigates the authenticity of the Questio via computational authorship verification (AV), a class of techniques which combine supervised machine learning and stylometry. We build a family of AV systems and assemble a corpus of 330 13th- and 14th-century Latin texts, which we use to comparatively evaluate the AV systems through leave-one-out cross-validation. Our best-performing system achieves high verification accuracy (F1=0.970) despite the heterogeneity of the corpus in terms of textual genre. The key contribution to the accuracy of this system is shown to come from Distributional Random Oversampling (DRO), a technique specially tailored to text classification which is here used for the first time in AV. The application of the AV system to the Questio returns a highly confident prediction concerning its authenticity. These findings contribute to the debate on the authorship of the Questio, and highlight DRO's potential in the application of AV to cultural heritage.

Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Alejandro Moreo, Andrea Pedrotti, Fabrizio Sebastiani

\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.

Alessandro Fabris, Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo et al.

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.

Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Silvia Corbara, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani et al.

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.

Preslav Nakov, Alan Ritter, Sara Rosenthal et al.

This paper discusses the fourth year of the ``Sentiment Analysis in Twitter Task''. SemEval-2016 Task 4 comprises five subtasks, three of which represent a significant departure from previous editions. The first two subtasks are reruns from prior years and ask to predict the overall sentiment, and the sentiment towards a topic in a tweet. The three new subtasks focus on two variants of the basic ``sentiment classification in Twitter'' task. The first variant adopts a five-point scale, which confers an ordinal character to the classification task. The second variant focuses on the correct estimation of the prevalence of each class of interest, a task which has been called quantification in the supervised learning literature. The task continues to be very popular, attracting a total of 43 teams.

Pepa Atanasova, Georgi Karadzhov, Yasen Kiprov et al.

In recent years, the proliferation of smart mobile devices has lead to the gradual integration of search functionality within mobile platforms. This has created an incentive to move away from the "ten blue links'' metaphor, as mobile users are less likely to click on them, expecting to get the answer directly from the snippets. In turn, this has revived the interest in Question Answering. Then, along came chatbots, conversational systems, and messaging platforms, where the user needs could be better served with the system asking follow-up questions in order to better understand the user's intent. While typically a user would expect a single response at any utterance, a system could also return multiple options for the user to select from, based on different system understandings of the user's intent. However, this possibility should not be overused, as this practice could confuse and/or annoy the user. How to produce good variable-length lists, given the conflicting objectives of staying short while maximizing the likelihood of having a correct answer included in the list, is an underexplored problem. It is also unclear how to evaluate a system that tries to do that. Here we aim to bridge this gap. In particular, we define some necessary and some optional properties that an evaluation measure fit for this purpose should have. We further show that existing evaluation measures from the IR tradition are not entirely suitable for this setup, and we propose novel evaluation measures that address it satisfactorily.

Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

\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.

Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Alejandro Moreo Fernández, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

In information retrieval (IR) and related tasks, term weighting approaches typically consider the frequency of the term in the document and in the collection in order to compute a score reflecting the importance of the term for the document. In tasks characterized by the presence of training data (such as text classification) it seems logical that the term weighting function should take into account the distribution (as estimated from training data) of the term across the classes of interest. Although `supervised term weighting' approaches that use this intuition have been described before, they have failed to show consistent improvements. In this article we analyse the possible reasons for this failure, and call consolidated assumptions into question. Following this criticism we propose a novel supervised term weighting approach that, instead of relying on any predefined formula, learns a term weighting function optimised on the training set of interest; we dub this approach \emph{Learning to Weight} (LTW). The experiments that we run on several well-known benchmarks, and using different learning methods, show that our method outperforms previous term weighting approaches in text classification.

Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo, Fabrizio Sebastiani

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.

Fabrizio Sebastiani

Quantification is the task of estimating, given a set $σ$ of unlabelled items and a set of classes $\mathcal{C}=\{c_{1}, \ldots, c_{|\mathcal{C}|}\}$, the prevalence (or `relative frequency') in $σ$ of each class $c_{i}\in \mathcal{C}$. While quantification may in principle be solved by classifying each item in $σ$ and counting how many such items have been labelled with $c_{i}$, it has long been shown that this `classify and count' (CC) method yields suboptimal quantification accuracy. As a result, quantification is no longer considered a mere byproduct of classification, and has evolved as a task of its own. While the scientific community has devoted a lot of attention to devising more accurate quantification methods, it has not devoted much to discussing what properties an \emph{evaluation measure for quantification} (EMQ) should enjoy, and which EMQs should be adopted as a result. This paper lies down a number of interesting properties that an EMQ may or may not enjoy, discusses if (and when) each of these properties is desirable, surveys the EMQs that have been used so far, and discusses whether they enjoy or not the above properties. As a result of this investigation, some of the EMQs that have been used in the literature turn out to be severely unfit, while others emerge as closer to what the quantification community actually needs. However, a significant result is that no existing EMQ satisfies all the properties identified as desirable, thus indicating that more research is needed in order to identify (or synthesize) a truly adequate EMQ.

Andrea Esuli, Alejandro Moreo Fernández, Fabrizio Sebastiani

Quantification is a supervised learning task that consists in predicting, given a set of classes C and a set D of unlabelled items, the prevalence (or relative frequency) p(c|D) of each class c in C. Quantification can in principle be solved by classifying all the unlabelled items and counting how many of them have been attributed to each class. However, this "classify and count" approach has been shown to yield suboptimal quantification accuracy; this has established quantification as a task of its own, and given rise to a number of methods specifically devised for it. We propose a recurrent neural network architecture for quantification (that we call QuaNet) that observes the classification predictions to learn higher-order "quantification embeddings", which are then refined by incorporating quantification predictions of simple classify-and-count-like methods. We test {QuaNet on sentiment quantification on text, showing that it substantially outperforms several state-of-the-art baselines.

Amartya Sanyal, Pawan Kumar, Purushottam Kar et al.

We present a class of algorithms capable of directly training deep neural networks with respect to large families of task-specific performance measures such as the F-measure and the Kullback-Leibler divergence that are structured and non-decomposable. This presents a departure from standard deep learning techniques that typically use squared or cross-entropy loss functions (that are decomposable) to train neural networks. We demonstrate that directly training with task-specific loss functions yields much faster and more stable convergence across problems and datasets. Our proposed algorithms and implementations have several novel features including (i) convergence to first order stationary points despite optimizing complex objective functions; (ii) use of fewer training samples to achieve a desired level of convergence, (iii) a substantial reduction in training time, and (iv) a seamless integration of our implementation into existing symbolic gradient frameworks. We implement our techniques on a variety of deep architectures including multi-layer perceptrons and recurrent neural networks and show that on a variety of benchmark and real data sets, our algorithms outperform traditional approaches to training deep networks, as well as some recent approaches to task-specific training of neural networks.

Purushottam Kar, Shuai Li, Harikrishna Narasimhan et al.

The estimation of class prevalence, i.e., the fraction of a population that belongs to a certain class, is a very useful tool in data analytics and learning, and finds applications in many domains such as sentiment analysis, epidemiology, etc. For example, in sentiment analysis, the objective is often not to estimate whether a specific text conveys a positive or a negative sentiment, but rather estimate the overall distribution of positive and negative sentiments during an event window. A popular way of performing the above task, often dubbed quantification, is to use supervised learning to train a prevalence estimator from labeled data. Contemporary literature cites several performance measures used to measure the success of such prevalence estimators. In this paper we propose the first online stochastic algorithms for directly optimizing these quantification-specific performance measures. We also provide algorithms that optimize hybrid performance measures that seek to balance quantification and classification performance. Our algorithms present a significant advancement in the theory of multivariate optimization and we show, by a rigorous theoretical analysis, that they exhibit optimal convergence. We also report extensive experiments on benchmark and real data sets which demonstrate that our methods significantly outperform existing optimization techniques used for these performance measures.

Walid Magdy, Hassan Sajjad, Tarek El-Ganainy et al.

Microblog classification has received a lot of attention in recent years. Different classification tasks have been investigated, most of them focusing on classifying microblogs into a small number of classes (five or less) using a training set of manually annotated tweets. Unfortunately, labelling data is tedious and expensive, and finding tweets that cover all the classes of interest is not always straightforward, especially when some of the classes do not frequently arise in practice. In this paper we study an approach to tweet classification based on distant supervision, whereby we automatically transfer labels from one social medium to another for a single-label multi-class classification task. In particular, we apply YouTube video classes to tweets linking to these videos. This provides for free a virtually unlimited number of labelled instances that can be used as training data. The classification experiments we have run show that training a tweet classifier via these automatically labelled data achieves substantially better performance than training the same classifier with a limited amount of manually labelled data; this is advantageous, given that the automatically labelled data come at no cost. Further investigation of our approach shows its robustness when applied with different numbers of classes and across different languages.

Giacomo Berardi, Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

\emph{Semi-Automated Text Classification} (SATC) may be defined as the task of ranking a set $\mathcal{D}$ of automatically labelled textual documents in such a way that, if a human annotator validates (i.e., inspects and corrects where appropriate) the documents in a top-ranked portion of $\mathcal{D}$ with the goal of increasing the overall labelling accuracy of $\mathcal{D}$, the expected increase is maximized. An obvious SATC strategy is to rank $\mathcal{D}$ so that the documents that the classifier has labelled with the lowest confidence are top-ranked. In this work we show that this strategy is suboptimal. We develop new utility-theoretic ranking methods based on the notion of \emph{validation gain}, defined as the improvement in classification effectiveness that would derive by validating a given automatically labelled document. We also propose a new effectiveness measure for SATC-oriented ranking methods, based on the expected reduction in classification error brought about by partially validating a list generated by a given ranking method. We report the results of experiments showing that, with respect to the baseline method above, and according to the proposed measure, our utility-theoretic ranking methods can achieve substantially higher expected reductions in classification error.

Andrea Esuli, Fabrizio Sebastiani

We address the problem of \emph{quantification}, a supervised learning task whose goal is, given a class, to estimate the relative frequency (or \emph{prevalence}) of the class in a dataset of unlabelled items. Quantification has several applications in data and text mining, such as estimating the prevalence of positive reviews in a set of reviews of a given product, or estimating the prevalence of a given support issue in a dataset of transcripts of phone calls to tech support. So far, quantification has been addressed by learning a general-purpose classifier, counting the unlabelled items which have been assigned the class, and tuning the obtained counts according to some heuristics. In this paper we depart from the tradition of using general-purpose classifiers, and use instead a supervised learning model for \emph{structured prediction}, capable of generating classifiers directly optimized for the (multivariate and non-linear) function used for evaluating quantification accuracy. The experiments that we have run on 5500 binary high-dimensional datasets (averaging more than 14,000 documents each) show that this method is more accurate, more stable, and more efficient than existing, state-of-the-art quantification methods.

Diego Marcheggiani, Fabrizio Sebastiani

In the last five years there has been a flurry of work on information extraction from clinical documents, i.e., on algorithms capable of extracting, from the informal and unstructured texts that are generated during everyday clinical practice, mentions of concepts relevant to such practice. Most of this literature is about methods based on supervised learning, i.e., methods for training an information extraction system from manually annotated examples. While a lot of work has been devoted to devising learning methods that generate more and more accurate information extractors, no work has been devoted to investigating the effect of the quality of training data on the learning process. Low quality in training data often derives from the fact that the person who has annotated the data is different from the one against whose judgment the automatically annotated data must be evaluated. In this paper we test the impact of such data quality issues on the accuracy of information extraction systems as applied to the clinical domain. We do this by comparing the accuracy deriving from training data annotated by the authoritative coder (i.e., the one who has also annotated the test data, and by whose judgment we must abide), with the accuracy deriving from training data annotated by a different coder. The results indicate that, although the disagreement between the two coders (as measured on the training set) is substantial, the difference is (surprisingly enough) not always statistically significant.