Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Social networks have grown exponentially in use and impact on the society as a whole. In particular, microblogging platforms such as Twitter have become important tools to assess public opinion on different issues. Recently, some approaches for assessing Twitter messages have been developed, identifying sentiments associated with relevant keywords or hashtags. However, such approaches have an important limitation, as they do not take into account contradictory and potentially inconsistent information which might emerge from relevant messages. We contend that the information made available in Twitter can be useful to extract a particular version of arguments (called “opinions” in our formalization) which emerge bottom-up from the social interaction associated with such messages. In this paper we present a novel framework which allows to mine opinions from Twitter based on incrementally generated queries. As a result, we will be able to obtain an “opinion tree”, rooted in the first original query. Distinguished, conflicting elements in an opinion tree lead to so-called “conflict trees”, which resemble dialectical trees as those used traditionally in defeasible argumentation.1 ¹

This paper extends preliminary work [11] presented at the First International Conference on Agreement Technologies (AT 2012), held in Dubrovnik, Croatia, in October 2012.

Keywords

Argumentation opinion mining social media

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

[1]

Abbas and

Sawamura, Argument mining based on a structured database and its usage in an intelligent tutoring environment, Knowl. Inf. Syst. 30(1) (2012), 213–246.

[2]

Amgoud and

Serrurier, Agents that argue and explain classifications, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 16(2) (2008), 187–209.

[3]

Besnard and

Hunter, The Elements of Argumentation, MIT Press, London, 2008.

[4]

Cao,

M.A.

Thompson and

Yu, Sentiment analysis in decision sciences research: an illustration to it governance, Decision Support Systems 54(2) (2013), 1010–1015.

[5]

C.I.

Chesñevar,

A.G.

Maguitman,

Estevez and

R.F.

Brena, Integrating argumentation technologies and context-based search for intelligent processing of citizens’ opinion in social media, in: ICEGOV,

Ferriero,

T.A.

Pardo and

Qian, eds, ACM, New York, 2012, pp. 166–170.

[6]

Choi and

Kim, Sentiment analysis for tracking breaking events: A case study on Twitter, in: ACIIDS (2),

Selamat,

N.T.

Nguyen and

Haron, eds, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7803, Springer, Berlin, 2013, pp. 285–294.

[7]

Feldman, Techniques and applications for sentiment analysis, Commun. ACM 56(4) (2013), 82–89.

[8]

Gabbriellini and

Torroni, Large scale agreements via microdebates, in: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Agreement Technologies, AT 2012, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 15–16 October 2012,

Ossowski,

Toni and

G.A.

Vouros, eds, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 918, 2012, pp. 366–377, available at: ceur-ws.org.

[9]

Ganter and

Wille, Formal Concept Analysis – Mathematical Foundations, Springer, 1999.

10.

[10]

A.J.

García and

G.R.

Simari, Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1,2) (2004), 95–138.

11.

[11]

Grosse,

C.I.

Chesñevar and

A.G.

Maguitman, An argument-based approach to mining opinions from Twitter, in: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Agreement Technologies, AT 2012, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 15–16 October 2012,

Ossowski,

Toni and

G.A.

Vouros, eds, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 918, 2012, pp. 408–422, available at: ceur-ws.org.

12.

[12]

Kontopoulos,

Berberidis,

Dergiades and

Bassiliades, Ontology-based sentiment analysis of Twitter posts, Expert Syst. Appl. 40(10) (2013), 4065–4074.

13.

[13]

Leite and

Martins, Social abstract argumentation, in: IJCAI,

Walsh, ed., IJCAI/AAAI, 2011, pp. 2287–2292.

14.

[14]

Martineau, Identifying and isolating text classification signals from domain and genre noise for sentiment analysis, PhD thesis, Univ. Maryland, Baltimore County, USA, 2011.

15.

[15]

T.M.

Mitchell, Generalization as search, Artif. Intell. 18(2) (1982), 203–226.

16.

[16]

Mizumoto,

Yanagimoto and

Yoshioka, Sentiment analysis of stock market news with semi-supervised learning, in: ACIS-ICIS,

Miao,

R.Y.

Lee,

Zeng and

Baik, eds, IEEE, 2012, pp. 325–328.

17.

[17]

Modgil,

Toni,

Bex,

Bratko,

Chesñevar,

Dvořák,

M.A.

Falappa,

S.A.

Gaggl,

A.J.

García,

M.P.

Gonzalez,

T.F.

Gordon,

Leite,

Mozina,

Reed,

G.R.

Simari,

Szeider,

Torroni and

Woltran, The added value of argumentation: Examples and challenges, in: Handbook of Agreement Technologies, Springer, Berlin, 2013, pp. 357–404.

18.

[18]

Pak and

Paroubek, Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining, in: LREC,

Calzolari,

Choukri,

Maegaard,

Mariani,

Odijk,

Piperidis,

Rosner and

Tapias, eds, European Language Resources Association, 2010.

19.

[19]

Rahwan and

Simari, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Springer, Berlin, 2009.

20.

[20]

Thelwall,

Buckley and

Paltoglou, Sentiment in Twitter events, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 62(2) (2011), 406–418.

21.

[21]

Thelwall,

Buckley and

Paltoglou, Sentiment strength detection for the social web, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 63(1) (2012), 163–173.

22.

[22]

Toni and

Torroni, Bottom-up argumentation, in: TAFA,

Modgil,

Oren and

Toni, eds, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7132, Springer, Berlin, 2011, pp. 249–262.

23.

[23]

Wagner,

Singer,

Posch and

Strohmaier, The wisdom of the audience: An empirical study of social semantics in Twitter streams, in: ESWC,

Cimiano,

Ó.

Corcho,

Presutti,

Hollink and

Rudolph, eds, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7882, Springer, Berlin, 2013, pp. 502–516.

Integrating argumentation and sentiment analysis for mining opinions from Twitter

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References