An interactive multi-agent reasoning model for sentiment analysis: a case for computational semiotics

被引:7
作者
Akhtar, Junaid [1 ]
机构
[1] Namal Inst, Mianwali, Pakistan
关键词
Semiotics; Multi-agent learning; Sentiment analysis; Human-centered AI; WORD;
D O I
10.1007/s10462-019-09785-6
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Semiotics is a domain that studies signs. For Peircean semiotics, a sign is not a dyadic entity, composed of a word and its meaning. Instead, meaning-making is a process of signification borne out of a strictly triadic relationship; in which a representative of a sign (word(s)) stands for its object (or meaning,) but never in a vacuum, and always for an interpretant. For Peirce, it is this third, this interpretant, through which the sign displays its meaning. What is even more important is that this rational process of signification is never being carried out by a single Mind, it requires a community of reasoners. In semiotic terms this article translates the sentiment analysis problem as follows: A sentence/comment is a representamen which has a sentiment value (its object) for an evolving community of reasoning agents (interpretant.) This article presents an interactive multi-agent system in which the agents implicitly model other agents, with a semiotic based approach towards sentiment analysis. It then tests the system on an original student evaluation of teachers dataset, compares the results with deep learning and other baseline techniques, and aims to propose semiotics as a reparative alternative to the dominant dichotomies-rule-based and data-based camps within artificial intelligence.
引用
收藏
页码:3987 / 4004
页数:18
相关论文
共 45 条
[11]  
Doeben-Henisch G, 2009, AFRICON 2009 AFRICON, P1
[12]  
Gudwin R, 2005, 2005 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTEGRATION OF KNOWLEDGE INTENSIVE MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS, P393
[13]  
Guerini M., 2013, Sentiment Analysis: How to Derive Prior Polarities from SentiWordNet
[14]  
Israel D, 2013, RANDOM THOUGHTS RAND
[15]  
Jansen P, 2014, PROCEEDINGS OF THE 52ND ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS, VOL 1, P977
[16]  
Joslyn C., 2000, SIMULATION PLANNING, P70
[17]  
Jovanoski D., 2015, P INT C RECENT ADV N, P249
[18]  
Kim Y., 2014, P EMNLP 19, DOI DOI 10.3115/V1/D14-1181
[19]   Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation [J].
Kraus, S ;
Sycara, K ;
Evenchik, A .
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 1998, 104 (1-2) :1-69
[20]  
Le Q., 2014, PR MACH LEARN RES, P1188