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
Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert

Gili Goldin

dblp:228/5460 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author

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%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › text mining › authorship analysis
native language identification		 0.312018
Native Language Identification with User Generated Content · EMNLP 2018
Computational social science and digital humanities
social media analysis		 0.112018
Native Language Identification with User Generated Content · EMNLP 2018

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

linguistic feature analysis · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Native Language Identification with User Generated Content
abstract
We address the task of native language identification in the context of social media content, where authors are highly-fluent, advanced nonnative speakers (of English).Using both linguistically-motivated features and the characteristics of the social media outlet, we obtain high accuracy on this challenging task.We provide a detailed analysis of the features that sheds light on differences between native and nonnative speakers, and among nonnative speakers with different backgrounds.
Gili Goldin, Ella Rabinovich, Shuly Wintner
 EMNLP1