Meet fuck site gratis praten 2016 all email on marriage dating america site
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).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.
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.For our experiment, we selected 600 authors for whom we were able to determine with a high degree of certainty a) that they were human individuals and b) what gender they were.We then experimented with several author profiling techniques, namely Support Vector Regression (as provided by LIBSVM; (Chang and Lin 2011)), Linguistic Profiling (LP; (van Halteren 2004)), and Ti MBL (Daelemans et al.Their highest score when using just text features was 75.5%, testing on all the tweets by each author (with a train set of 3.3 million tweets and a test set of about 418,000 tweets). (2012) used SVMlight to classify gender on Nigerian twitter accounts, with tweets in English, with a minimum of 50 tweets.Their features were hash tags, token unigrams and psychometric measurements provided by the Linguistic Inquiry of Word Count software (LIWC; (Pennebaker et al. Although LIWC appears a very interesting addition, it hardly adds anything to the classification.