Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Parsa Ghaffari

dblp:180/7211 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Information extraction and text analysis · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › sentiment analysis
aspect-based sentiment analysis
0.212016
A Hierarchical Model of Reviews for Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis · EMNLP 2016
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › text classification
neural text classification
0.212016
A Hierarchical Model of Reviews for Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis · EMNLP 2016
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
sentiment analysis
0.212016
A Hierarchical Model of Reviews for Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis · EMNLP 2016
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
review analysis
0.112016
A Hierarchical Model of Reviews for Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis · EMNLP 2016

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

hierarchical bidirectional LSTM · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 A Hierarchical Model of Reviews for Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis
abstract
Opinion mining from customer reviews has become pervasive in recent years.Sentences in reviews, however, are usually classified independently, even though they form part of a review's argumentative structure.Intuitively, sentences in a review build and elaborate upon each other; knowledge of the review structure and sentential context should thus inform the classification of each sentence.We demonstrate this hypothesis for the task of aspect-based sentiment analysis by modeling the interdependencies of sentences in a review with a hierarchical bidirectional LSTM.We show that the hierarchical model outperforms two non-hierarchical baselines, obtains results competitive with the state-of-the-art, and outperforms the state-of-the-art on five multilingual, multi-domain datasets without any handengineered features or external resources.
Sebastian Ruder, Parsa Ghaffari, John G. Breslin
EMNLP2