Abstract

This article investigates the integration of machine learning in the political claim annotation workflow with the goal to partially automate the annotation and analysis of large text corpora. It introduces the MARDY annotation environment and presents results from an experiment in which the annotation quality of annotators with and without machine learning based annotation support is compared. The design and setting aim to measure and evaluate: a) annotation speed; b) annotation quality; and c) applicability to the use case of discourse network generation. While the results indicate only slight increases in terms of annotation speed, the authors find a moderate boost in annotation quality. Additionally, with the help of manual annotation of the actors and filtering out of the false positives, the machine learning based annotation suggestions allow the authors to fully recover the core network of the discourse as extracted from the articles annotated during the experiment. This is due to the redundancy which is naturally present in the annotated texts. Thus, assuming a research focus not on the complete network but the network core, an AI-based annotation can provide reliable information about discourse networks with much less human intervention than compared to the traditional manual approach.

Highlights

  • Discourse network analysis (DNA) offers a conceptual framework for the analysis of discourse structures and dynamics

  • A natural question to ask is how good the AI annotator is. We will answer this question in two steps: In Section 4, after having provided more details concerning the technical side of the AI pseudoannotator, we will discuss its performance from a Natural Language Processing (NLP) perspective; in Section 5, we will present the results of a computer-assisted annotation experiment in which the AI will be employed to suggest relevant claims to the annotators

  • While the integration of machine learning in annotation workflows has been suggested before, no working systems have yet been developed that leverage machine learning for corpus creation and text selection and for the actual annotation of texts using complex and multifaceted abstract categories

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Discourse network analysis (DNA) offers a conceptual framework for the analysis of discourse structures and dynamics. The second group of approaches tries to capture complex meaning structures on a more fine-grained level They usually rely on more or less extensive annotation of the raw text material by human annotators, following a codebook that provides categories at a certain level of abstraction from the original text in order to identify political claims (Koopmans & Statham, 2010), frames (D’Angelo & Kuypers, 2010), or evaluative statements (Schmidtke & Nullmeier, 2011). A natural question to ask is how good the AI annotator is We will answer this question in two steps: In Section 4, after having provided more details concerning the technical side of the AI pseudoannotator, we will discuss its performance from a Natural Language Processing (NLP) perspective; in Section 5, we will present the results of a computer-assisted annotation experiment in which the AI will be employed to suggest relevant claims to the annotators (and not just to the experts in the gold merging stage)

The AI-Pseudo-Annotator
Developing Claim Identification and Classification Methods
Evaluation of Classifier Quality
Annotation Experiment
Discourse Networks
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call