Gratis datingsite noord brabant online dating club kolkata

2009) managed to increase the gender recognition quality to 89.2%, using sentence length, 35 non-dictionary words, and 52 slang words.The authors do not report the set of slang words, but the non-dictionary words appear to be more related to style than to content, showing that purely linguistic behaviour can contribute information for gender recognition as well.

gratis datingsite noord brabant-48gratis datingsite noord brabant-30

Gratis datingsite noord brabant

For each blogger, metadata is present, including the blogger s self-provided gender, age, industry and astrological sign. The creators themselves used it for various classification tasks, including gender recognition (Koppel et al. The men, on the other hand, seem to be more interested in computers, leading to important content words like software and game, and correspondingly more determiners and prepositions.

One gets the impression that gender recognition is more sociological than linguistic, showing what women and men were blogging about back in A later study (Goswami et al.

Later, in 2004, the group collected a Blog Authorship Corpus (BAC; (Schler et al.

2006)), containing about 700,000 posts to (in total about 140 million words) by almost 20,000 bloggers. Slightly more information seems to be coming from content (75.1% accuracy) than from style (72.0% accuracy). We see the women focusing on personal matters, leading to important content words like love and boyfriend, and important style words like I and other personal pronouns.

Then we describe our experimental data and the evaluation method (Section 3), after which we proceed to describe the various author profiling strategies that we investigated (Section 4). Gender Recognition Gender recognition is a subtask in the general field of authorship recognition and profiling, which has reached maturity in the last decades(for an overview, see e.g. Even so, there are circumstances where outright recognition is not an option, but where one must be content with profiling, i.e.

Then follow the results (Section 5), and Section 6 concludes the paper. For whom we already know that they are an individual person rather than, say, a husband and wife couple or a board of editors for an official Twitterfeed. the identification of author traits like gender, age and geographical background.Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands Journal 4 (2014) Submitted 06/2014; Published 12/2014 Gender Recognition on Dutch Tweets Hans van Halteren Nander Speerstra Radboud University Nijmegen, CLS, Linguistics Abstract In this paper, we investigate gender recognition on Dutch Twitter material, using a corpus consisting of the full Tweet production (as far as present in the Twi NL data set) of 600 users (known to be human individuals) over 2011 and We experimented with several authorship profiling techniques and various recognition features, using Tweet text only, in order to determine how well they could distinguish between male and female authors of Tweets.We achieved the best results, 95.5% correct assignment in a 5-fold cross-validation on our corpus, with Support Vector Regression on all token unigrams.The age component of the system is described in (Nguyen et al. The authors apply logistic and linear regression on counts of token unigrams occurring at least 10 times in their corpus.The paper does not describe the gender component, but the first author has informed us that the accuracy of the gender recognition on the basis of 200 tweets is about 87% (Nguyen, personal communication). (2014) did a crowdsourcing experiment, in which they asked human participants to guess the gender and age on the basis of 20 to 40 tweets. on this, we will still take the biological gender as the gold standard in this paper, as our eventual goal is creating metadata for the Twi NL collection. Experimental Data and Evaluation In this section, we first describe the corpus that we used in our experiments (Section 3.1).The general quality of the assignment is unknown, but in the (for this purpose) rather unrepresentative sample of users we considered for our own gender assignment corpus (see below), we find that about 44% of the users are assigned a gender, which is correct in about 87% of the cases.

Tags: , ,