A new hierarchy framework for feature engineering through multi‐objective evolutionary algorithm in text classification

Summary Sentiment classification is a field of sentiment analysis concerned with analyzing opinions, emotions, evaluations, and attitudes regarding a special topic like a product, an organization, a person, or an incident. With the growth of user‐generated content on the Web, this field gained great...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Concurrency and computation Jg. 34; H. 3
Hauptverfasser: Asgarnezhad, Razieh, Monadjemi, S. Amirhassan, Aghaei, Mohammadreza Soltan
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.02.2022
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Schlagworte:
ISSN:1532-0626, 1532-0634
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary Sentiment classification is a field of sentiment analysis concerned with analyzing opinions, emotions, evaluations, and attitudes regarding a special topic like a product, an organization, a person, or an incident. With the growth of user‐generated content on the Web, this field gained great importance in online reviews. With a wide range of reviews, customers cannot read all reviews. Considering the increasing rate of electronic documents and the urgent need manually mine for keywords that are hard and time‐consuming, doing the same automatically is of high demand. A new framework proposed here to mine and classify users' comments based on mining keywords by applying the sequence pattern mining through the Separation‐Power concept, a multi‐objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition with four objectives, and a neural network as the final classifier. Some modifications are made on multi‐objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition and Apriori algorithms to improve the text classification efficiency. To evaluate the proposed framework, three datasets applied; which compared with the two methods to measure accuracy, precision, recall, and error‐index. The results indicate that this framework provides a better outcome than its counterparts with 99.45 precision, 99.34 accuracy, 99.48 recall, and 99.28% f‐measure.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1532-0626
1532-0634
DOI:10.1002/cpe.6594