4.7 Article

Three-way enhanced convolutional neural networks for sentence-level sentiment classification

期刊

INFORMATION SCIENCES
卷 477, 期 -, 页码 55-64

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.10.030

关键词

Three-way decisions; Sentiment classification; Convolutional neural networks

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [213]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [61673301]
  3. Major Project of Ministry of Public Security [20170004]
  4. Open Research Funds of State Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology [KFKT2017B22]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Deep neural network models have achieved remarkable results in sentiment classification. Traditional feature-based methods perform slightly worse than deep learning methods in terms of classification accuracy, but they have their own advantages in interpretability and time complexity. To the best of our knowledge, few works study the ensemble of deep learning methods and traditional feature-based methods. Inspired by the methodology of three-way decisions, we proposed a three-way enhanced convolutional neural network model named 3W-CNN. 3W-CNN can be seen as an ensemble method which uses the enhance model to optimize convolutional neural networks (CNN). The enhance model is selected according to the classification accuracy and the difference in classification results compared to CNN. Support vector machine with naive bayes features (NB-SVM) is selected as the enhance model after comparing with several baseline models. However, the performance of NB-SVM is worse than CNN on most of benchmark datasets. To address this issue, we construct a component named confidence divider and design a confidence function to distinguish the classification quality of CNN. NB-SVM is further utilized to reclassify the predictions with weak confidence. The experimental results validated the effectiveness of 3W-CNN and showed three-way decisions could further improve the accuracy of sentiment classification. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据