[Announcements]
[General Information]
[Syllabus]
- April 10: Data Analysis Assisgnment 2 out today. It is due in a week, April 17 before class
- Feb 14: Project Descriptions up on Corseworks under Assignments. Examples of Project ideas also included
- Feb 13: Class Canceled due to weather (All Columbia Classes are canceled after 3pm)
- Feb 1: Selection of presenters for paper discussion up (names appear near the assigned paper).
- Jan 29: Class set up also on Columbia's Courseworks.
- Jan 28: List of discussion papers is up. Each student will lead discussion on one paper. Please bring to class
on Thursday Jan 30th, a list of your top five choices. Please write down your name
- Jan 27: Full list of readings for the semester will be up by Tuesday, Jan 28 11:59pm (an email will be send out, and this space updated)
- Welcome to Computational Models of Social Meaning!
[Top]
Description
Computational Models of Social Meaning is a seminar in Natural Language Processing, focusing on computational methods for extracting social
and interactional meaning, mainly from conversational text (and speech). Topics include detection of speaker's sentiments, emotions, opinions and beliefs,
sarcasm, deception, persuation, perspective, power and influence, politeness, and personality. Analysis of meaning-bearing characteristics of the
speaker and topic, including text, discourse, prosodic and other cues.
Prerequisites
- COMS 3133/4/7/9 (Data Structures) or equivalent programming ability in at least one systems or scripting language (C++, Java, Python)
- smara [who is at] ccls [dot] columbia [dot] edu
- Office Hours: Thursdays 6:00pm-7:00pm
TA: Arpit Gupta
- ta [dot] cmsm [AT] gmail [dot] com
- Office Hours: Mondays 4:15pm-5:15pm in the TA room in Mudd
Lectures
- Thursday 4:10-6:00, MUD 644
The class consists of lectures and discussion of research papers led by students. To facilitate the discussion of research articles
on a particular topic each week, an introduction to the topic is given in the previous week. Thus, the class structure will be as follows:
50 min discussion of two research articles led by students on the topic of the week (intro to the topic given in the previous week); 30 minutes in
depth lecture and discussion of open questions related to the topic of the week; 25 minutes Intro lecture to the topic of the following week
(to facilitate paper discussion).
Grade Breakdown
- 10% Data Analysis Assignments
There will be 2 data analysis assignments that will require relatively small amount of work to learn
about a data source. You will be asked to answer one or two questions and to notice some interesting
points about the data source. The grading for this will be Excellent/Good/Insufficient. The data
analysis assignments will be due before class, on Courseworks site. Late assignments will not be accepted, except emergency situations.
- 30% Discussion of Papers
Each student will do a critical discussion of one of the research articles proposed for reading.
Students will prepare a brief presentation of the paper followed by leading a critical
discussion on key positive and negative aspects, availability of code and datasets.
Full reading list will be up Tuesday Jan 28 at 11:59pm . Each student will prepare a list of her/his
top five choices and bring it to class on January 30th. Please write down you name! Final selection will be done by
TA/instrutor by Feb 1 . We will try to take into account your preferences, so it is important you bring those to class on Jan 30.
- 60% Final Project
Design and implement a software
product of appropriate scope and complexity given the time
constraints. Project should be related to one topic discussed in class or related issues.
Prepare a literature review (by mid semester), give a class presentation and a paper write-up
describing the methodology and results. Groups of 2-3 are welcome as
is individual work (complexity expectations being tuned accordingly). Split up of grades will be
10% for literature review, 5% class presentations, 45% for project and final paper.
[Top]
Schedule is tentative and highly subject to change.
"
Date |
Topics |
Readings |
Due dates |
1/23 |
Class Introduction |
|
|
1/30 |
Sentiment Lexicon &
Intro to Sentiment Analysis |
Discussion papers:
|
Data Analysis Assignment 1 out |
2/6 |
Sentiment Analysis &
Intro do Emotion/Mood |
General reading for lecture
Discussion papers:
|
Data Analysis Assignment 1 Due |
2/13 |
Canceled due to Snow
|
|
|
2/20 |
Emotion/Mood &
Intro to Hedge & Belief Analysis |
Discussion papers:
|
|
2/27 |
Hedge Detection and Belief Analysis &
Intro to Irony and Sarcasm; Detecting Conflicting Statements |
General Readings:
Discussion papers:
|
Project Ideas due |
3/6 |
Irony/Sarcasm & Detecting Contradictory Statements &
Intro to Agreement/Disagreement |
General readings (optional)
- Ido Dagan, Dan Roth, Mark Sammons, Fabio Zanzotto. Recognizing Textual Entailment. Synthesis Lecture on Human Language Technologies. Graeme Hirst (ed).
(Chapater 1, 4).[book uploded on CourseWorks Files\&Resources/Readings]
- Roberto Gonzalez-Ibanez, Smaranda Muresan, Nina Wacholder (2011). Identifying Sarcasm in Twitter: A Closer Look . Proceedings of ACL-HTL 2011 (short paper).
Discussion papers:
- Riloff, Ellen, Qadir, Ashequl, Surve, Prafulla, Silva, Lalindra De, Gilbert, Nathan and Huang, Ruihong. Sarcasm as Contrast between a Positive Sentiment and Negative Situation Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 704–714. [Ashima Arora] <
- Tepperman, Joseph, David Traum, and Shrikanth Narayanan. 2006. Yeah right: Sarcasm recognition for spoken dialogue systems . Proceedings of InterSpeech 2006. [Sara Garner]
- Alan Ritter, Doug Downey, Stephen Soderland, and Oren Etzioni. 2008. It's a contradiction---no, it's not: a case study using functional relations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP '08). [Priyan Agarwal]
|
Project Proposal due March 10 at 11:59pm |
3/13 |
Agreement/Disagreement &
Intro to Perspective |
Discussion Papers:
- Mark Sammons, V. G. Vinod Vydiswaran, and Dan Roth. 2010. Ask not what textual entailment can do for you...". In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL '10). [Christopher Yang]
- Murakami, Akiko and Rudy Raymond. 2010. Support or oppose?: Classifying positions in online debates from reply activities and opinion expressions. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Posters, pp. 869--875. Debanjan Ghosh
- Bender, Emily M, Jonathan T Morgan, Meghan Oxley, Mark Zachry, Brian Hutchinson, Alex Marin, Bin Zhang, and Mari Ostendorf. 2011. Annotating social acts: Authority claims and alignment moves in Wikipedia talk pages. Proceedings of the ACL-HLT Workshop on Language in Social Media, pp. 48--57. [SonYon Song]
|
|
3/20 |
No Lecture: Spring Break |
3/27 |
Perspective &
Intro to Decepton |
Discussion Papers:
|
|
4/3 |
Deception &
Intro to Social Power |
General readings (optional):
- DePaulo, Bella M.; James J. Lindsay; Brian E. Malone; Laura Muhlenbruck; Kelly Charlston;
and Harris Cooper. 2003. Cues to deception Psychological Bulletin 129(1):74–118.
- Enos, Frank, Elizabeth Shriberg, Martin Graciarena, Julia Hirschberg, and Andreas Stolcke. 2007. Detecting deception using critical segments. In Proceedings Interspeech, 1621-1624. Antwerp.
Discussion Papers:
|
Literature Review due |
4/10 |
Social Power
Guest Lecture |
General readings (guest lecture based on these)
Discussion Papers:
|
Data Analysis Assignment 2 out |
4/17 |
Extracting Social Networks from Text
Guest Lecture |
General Readings (guest lecture based on these)
Discussion Papers:
|
Data Analysis Assignment 2 DUE |
4/24 |
Personality and Interpersonal Stance |
Discussion Papers:
|
|
5/1 |
Final Project Presentations (Final projects writeup due May 7, 12pm) |
smara [who is at] ccls [dot] columbia [dot] edu
Design adapted from David Elson's site design
|