View source for Comparison mixed membership topic poisson

From Cohen Courses

← Comparison mixed membership topic poisson

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

---

You can view and copy the source of this page.

== Papers == Elena Erosheva, Stephen Fienberg, John Lafferty. Mixed Membership Models of Scientific Publications. PNAS (101) 2004. Tae Yano and Noah A. Smith. What’s Worthy of Comment? Content and Comment Volume in Political Blogs. Proc of ICWSM 2010. == Problems == The two papers deal with different types of problems. The goal of the PNAS paper is to model scientific publications using the mixed membership models. It's emphasis is to add references as an additional source, and model article contents and references simultaneously. However, the ICWSM paper focuses on predicting the volume of comments which are received by a blog post. == Method == == Datasets == The PNAS paper uses the PNSA archive of Biological Science articles between 1997 and 2001 as the dataset. This dataset totally contains 11,981 articles and 77,115 unique references. The ICWSM paper builds its dataset by collecting blog posts from two websites: [http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/issue/ Matthew Yglesias] and [http://www.redstate.com/ RedState]. Stops words are removed for preprocessing of texts. The mean volume is approximately 1424 words (35 comments) for Matthew Yglesias and 819 words (29 comments) for RedState. == Method ==

Return to Comparison mixed membership topic poisson.