@article{HollensteinTrondlePlomeckaetal.2023, author = {Hollenstein, Nora and Trondle, Marius and Plomecka, Martyna and Kiegeland, Samuel and Ozyurt, Yilmazcan and J{\"a}ger, Lena Ann and Langer, Nicolas}, title = {The ZuCo benchmark on cross-subject reading task classification with EEG and eye-tracking data}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {13}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1028824}, pages = {20}, year = {2023}, abstract = {We present a new machine learning benchmark for reading task classification with the goal of advancing EEG and eye-tracking research at the intersection between computational language processing and cognitive neuroscience. The benchmark task consists of a cross-subject classification to distinguish between two reading paradigms: normal reading and task-specific reading. The data for the benchmark is based on the Zurich Cognitive Language Processing Corpus (ZuCo 2.0), which provides simultaneous eye-tracking and EEG signals from natural reading of English sentences. The training dataset is publicly available, and we present a newly recorded hidden testset. We provide multiple solid baseline methods for this task and discuss future improvements. We release our code and provide an easy-to-use interface to evaluate new approaches with an accompanying public leaderboard: .}, language = {en} } @article{KibrikKhudyakovaDobrovetal.2016, author = {Kibrik, Andrej A. and Khudyakova, Mariya V. and Dobrov, Grigory B. and Linnik, Anastasia and Zalmanov, Dmitrij A.}, title = {Referential Choice}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {7}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01429}, year = {2016}, abstract = {We report a study of referential choice in discourse production, understood as the choice between various types of referential devices, such as pronouns and full noun phrases. Our goal is to predict referential choice, and to explore to what extent such prediction is possible. Our approach to referential choice includes a cognitively informed theoretical component, corpus analysis, machine learning methods and experimentation with human participants. Machine learning algorithms make use of 25 factors, including referent's properties (such as animacy and protagonism), the distance between a referential expression and its antecedent, the antecedent's syntactic role, and so on. Having found the predictions of our algorithm to coincide with the original almost 90\% of the time, we hypothesized that fully accurate prediction is not possible because, in many situations, more than one referential option is available. This hypothesis was supported by an experimental study, in which participants answered questions about either the original text in the corpus, or about a text modified in accordance with the algorithm's prediction. Proportions of correct answers to these questions, as well as participants' rating of the questions' difficulty, suggested that divergences between the algorithm's prediction and the original referential device in the corpus occur overwhelmingly in situations where the referential choice is not categorical.}, language = {en} } @misc{KibrikKhudyakovaDobrovetal.2016, author = {Kibrik, Andrej A. and Khudyakova, Mariya V. and Dobrov, Grigory B. and Linnik, Anastasia and Zalmanov, Dmitrij A.}, title = {Referential Choice}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-100313}, pages = {21}, year = {2016}, abstract = {We report a study of referential choice in discourse production, understood as the choice between various types of referential devices, such as pronouns and full noun phrases. Our goal is to predict referential choice, and to explore to what extent such prediction is possible. Our approach to referential choice includes a cognitively informed theoretical component, corpus analysis, machine learning methods and experimentation with human participants. Machine learning algorithms make use of 25 factors, including referent's properties (such as animacy and protagonism), the distance between a referential expression and its antecedent, the antecedent's syntactic role, and so on. Having found the predictions of our algorithm to coincide with the original almost 90\% of the time, we hypothesized that fully accurate prediction is not possible because, in many situations, more than one referential option is available. This hypothesis was supported by an experimental study, in which participants answered questions about either the original text in the corpus, or about a text modified in accordance with the algorithm's prediction. Proportions of correct answers to these questions, as well as participants' rating of the questions' difficulty, suggested that divergences between the algorithm's prediction and the original referential device in the corpus occur overwhelmingly in situations where the referential choice is not categorical.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Sidarenka2019, author = {Sidarenka, Uladzimir}, title = {Sentiment analysis of German Twitter}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43742}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-437422}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {vii, 217}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The immense popularity of online communication services in the last decade has not only upended our lives (with news spreading like wildfire on the Web, presidents announcing their decisions on Twitter, and the outcome of political elections being determined on Facebook) but also dramatically increased the amount of data exchanged on these platforms. Therefore, if we wish to understand the needs of modern society better and want to protect it from new threats, we urgently need more robust, higher-quality natural language processing (NLP) applications that can recognize such necessities and menaces automatically, by analyzing uncensored texts. Unfortunately, most NLP programs today have been created for standard language, as we know it from newspapers, or, in the best case, adapted to the specifics of English social media. This thesis reduces the existing deficit by entering the new frontier of German online communication and addressing one of its most prolific forms—users' conversations on Twitter. In particular, it explores the ways and means by how people express their opinions on this service, examines current approaches to automatic mining of these feelings, and proposes novel methods, which outperform state-of-the-art techniques. For this purpose, I introduce a new corpus of German tweets that have been manually annotated with sentiments, their targets and holders, as well as lexical polarity items and their contextual modifiers. Using these data, I explore four major areas of sentiment research: (i) generation of sentiment lexicons, (ii) fine-grained opinion mining, (iii) message-level polarity classification, and (iv) discourse-aware sentiment analysis. In the first task, I compare three popular groups of lexicon generation methods: dictionary-, corpus-, and word-embedding-based ones, finding that dictionary-based systems generally yield better polarity lists than the last two groups. Apart from this, I propose a linear projection algorithm, whose results surpass many existing automatically-generated lexicons. Afterwords, in the second task, I examine two common approaches to automatic prediction of sentiment spans, their sources, and targets: conditional random fields (CRFs) and recurrent neural networks, obtaining higher scores with the former model and improving these results even further by redefining the structure of CRF graphs. When dealing with message-level polarity classification, I juxtapose three major sentiment paradigms: lexicon-, machine-learning-, and deep-learning-based systems, and try to unite the first and last of these method groups by introducing a bidirectional neural network with lexicon-based attention. Finally, in order to make the new classifier aware of microblogs' discourse structure, I let it separately analyze the elementary discourse units of each tweet and infer the overall polarity of a message from the scores of its EDUs with the help of two new approaches: latent-marginalized CRFs and Recursive Dirichlet Process.}, language = {en} } @article{WulffBuschhueterWestphaletal.2020, author = {Wulff, Peter and Buschh{\"u}ter, David and Westphal, Andrea and Nowak, Anna and Becker, Lisa and Robalino, Hugo and Stede, Manfred and Borowski, Andreas}, title = {Computer-based classification of preservice physics teachers' written reflections}, series = {Journal of science education and technology}, volume = {30}, journal = {Journal of science education and technology}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {1059-0145}, doi = {10.1007/s10956-020-09865-1}, pages = {1 -- 15}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Reflecting in written form on one's teaching enactments has been considered a facilitator for teachers' professional growth in university-based preservice teacher education. Writing a structured reflection can be facilitated through external feedback. However, researchers noted that feedback in preservice teacher education often relies on holistic, rather than more content-based, analytic feedback because educators oftentimes lack resources (e.g., time) to provide more analytic feedback. To overcome this impediment to feedback for written reflection, advances in computer technology can be of use. Hence, this study sought to utilize techniques of natural language processing and machine learning to train a computer-based classifier that classifies preservice physics teachers' written reflections on their teaching enactments in a German university teacher education program. To do so, a reflection model was adapted to physics education. It was then tested to what extent the computer-based classifier could accurately classify the elements of the reflection model in segments of preservice physics teachers' written reflections. Multinomial logistic regression using word count as a predictor was found to yield acceptable average human-computer agreement (F1-score on held-out test dataset of 0.56) so that it might fuel further development towards an automated feedback tool that supplements existing holistic feedback for written reflections with data-based, analytic feedback.}, language = {en} }