Rumour stance classification, the task that determines if each tweet in a collection discussing a rumour is supporting, denying, questioning or simply commenting on the rumour, has been attracting substantial interest. Here we introduce a novel approach that makes use of the sequence of transitions observed in tree-structured conversation threads in Twitter. The conversation threads are formed by harvesting users' replies to one another, which results in a nested tree-like structure. Previous work addressing stance classification task in Twitter has treated each tweet as a separate unit. Here we analyse tweets by virtue of their position in a sequence and test two sequential classifiers, Linear-Chain CRF and Tree CRF, each of which makes different assumptions about the conversation structure. We experiment with eight Twitter datasets, collected during breaking news, and show that exploiting the sequential structure of Twitter conversations achieves significant improvements over the non-sequential methods. Our work is the first to model Twitter conversations as a tree structure in this manner, introducing a novel way of tackling NLP tasks on Twitter conversations.
Our work presents different objectives in three aspects. First, we aim to classify the stance of tweets towards rumours that emerge while breaking news unfold; these rumours are unlikely to have been observed before, and hence rumours from previously observed events, which are likely to diverge, need to be leveraged for training. As far as we know, only have tackled stance classification in the context of breaking news applied to new rumours. used Gaussian Processes to perform 3-way stance classification into supporting, denying or questioning, while comments where not considered as part of the task. did include comments to perform 4-way stance classification; they used Hawkes Processes to exploit the temporal sequence of stances towards rumours to classify new tweets discussing rumours. Work by @cite_16 has also performed stance classification for rumours around breaking news, but overlapping rumours were used for training and testing.
@cite_16
2347127863 2437771934 2311769156 2281420995
We can often detect from a person’s utterances whether he or she is in favor of or against a given target entity—one’s stance toward the target. However, a person may express the same stance toward a target by using negative or positive language. Here for the first time we present a dataset of tweet–target pairs annotated for both stance and sentiment. The targets may or may not be referred to in the tweets, and they may or may not be the target of opinion in the tweets. Partitions of this dataset were used as training and test sets in a SemEval-2016 shared task competition. We propose a simple stance detection system that outperforms submissions from all 19 teams that participated in the shared task. Additionally, access to both stance and sentiment annotations allows us to explore several research questions. We show that although knowing the sentiment expressed by a tweet is beneficial for stance classification, it alone is not sufficient. Finally, we use additional unlabeled data through distant supervision techniques and word embeddings to further improve stance classification. Stance detection is the task of classifying the attitude expressed in a text towards a target such as Hillary Clinton to be "positive", negative" or "neutral". Previous work has assumed that either the target is mentioned in the text or that training data for every target is given. This paper considers the more challenging version of this task, where targets are not always mentioned and no training data is available for the test targets. We experiment with conditional LSTM encoding, which builds a representation of the tweet that is dependent on the target, and demonstrate that it outperforms encoding the tweet and the target independently. Performance is improved further when the conditional model is augmented with bidirectional encoding. We evaluate our approach on the SemEval 2016 Task 6 Twitter Stance Detection corpus achieving performance second best only to a system trained on semi-automatically labelled tweets for the test target. When such weak supervision is added, our approach achieves state-of-the-art results. We present a framework for sentiment analysis on tweets related to news items. Given a set of tweets and news items, our framework classifies tweets as positive or negative and links them to the related news items. For the classification of tweets we use three of the most used machine learning methods, namely Naive Bayes, Complementary Naive Bayes, and Logistic Regression, and for linking tweets to news items, Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques are used, including Zemberek NLP library for stemming and morphological analysis and then bag-of-words method for mapping. To test the framework, we collected 6000 tweets and labeled them manually to build a classifier for sentiment analysis. We considered tweets and news in Turkish language only in this work. Our results show that Naive Bayes performs well on classifying tweets in Turkish. As breaking news unfolds people increasingly rely on social media to stay abreast of the latest updates. The use of social media in such situations comes with the caveat that new information being released piecemeal may encourage rumours, many of which remain unverified long after their point of release. Little is known, however, about the dynamics of the life cycle of a social media rumour. In this paper we present a methodology that has enabled us to collect, identify and annotate a dataset of 330 rumour threads (4,842 tweets) associated with 9 newsworthy events. We analyse this dataset to understand how users spread, support, or deny rumours that are later proven true or false, by distinguishing two levels of status in a rumour life cycle i.e., before and after its veracity status is resolved. The identification of rumours associated with each event, as well as the tweet that resolved each rumour as true or false, was performed by journalist members of the research team who tracked the events in real time. Our study shows that rumours that are ultimately proven true tend to be resolved faster than those that turn out to be false. Whilst one can readily see users denying rumours once they have been debunked, users appear to be less capable of distinguishing true from false rumours when their veracity remains in question. In fact, we show that the prevalent tendency for users is to support every unverified rumour. We also analyse the role of different types of users, finding that highly reputable users such as news organisations endeavour to post well-grounded statements, which appear to be certain and accompanied by evidence. Nevertheless, these often prove to be unverified pieces of information that give rise to false rumours. Our study reinforces the need for developing robust machine learning techniques that can provide assistance in real time for assessing the veracity of rumours. The findings of our study provide useful insights for achieving this aim.