Evaluating topic quality using model clustering

V. Mehta, R. Caceres, K. Carter
{"title":"Evaluating topic quality using model clustering","authors":"V. Mehta, R. Caceres, K. Carter","doi":"10.1109/CIDM.2014.7008665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Topic modeling continues to grow as a popular technique for finding hidden patterns, as well as grouping collections of new types of text and non-text data. Recent years have witnessed a growing body of work in developing metrics and techniques for evaluating the quality of topic models and the topics they generate. This is particularly true for text data where significant attention has been given to the semantic interpretability of topics using measures such as coherence. It has been shown however that topic assessments based on coherence metrics do not always align well with human judgment. Other efforts have examined the utility of information-theoretic distance metrics for evaluating topic quality in connection with semantic interpretability. Although there has been progress in evaluating interpretability of topics, the existing intrinsic evaluation metrics do not address some of the other aspects of concern in topic modeling such as: the number of topics to select, the ability to align topics from different models, and assessing the quality of training data. Here we propose an alternative metric for characterizing topic quality that addresses all three aforementioned issues. Our approach is based on clustering topics, and using the silhouette measure, a popular clustering index, for characterizing the quality of topics. We illustrate the utility of this approach in addressing the other topic modeling concerns noted above. Since this metric is not focused on interpretability, we believe it can be applied more broadly to text as well as non-text data. In this paper however we focus on the application of this metric to archival and non-archival text data.","PeriodicalId":117542,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM)","volume":"485 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CIDM.2014.7008665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Topic modeling continues to grow as a popular technique for finding hidden patterns, as well as grouping collections of new types of text and non-text data. Recent years have witnessed a growing body of work in developing metrics and techniques for evaluating the quality of topic models and the topics they generate. This is particularly true for text data where significant attention has been given to the semantic interpretability of topics using measures such as coherence. It has been shown however that topic assessments based on coherence metrics do not always align well with human judgment. Other efforts have examined the utility of information-theoretic distance metrics for evaluating topic quality in connection with semantic interpretability. Although there has been progress in evaluating interpretability of topics, the existing intrinsic evaluation metrics do not address some of the other aspects of concern in topic modeling such as: the number of topics to select, the ability to align topics from different models, and assessing the quality of training data. Here we propose an alternative metric for characterizing topic quality that addresses all three aforementioned issues. Our approach is based on clustering topics, and using the silhouette measure, a popular clustering index, for characterizing the quality of topics. We illustrate the utility of this approach in addressing the other topic modeling concerns noted above. Since this metric is not focused on interpretability, we believe it can be applied more broadly to text as well as non-text data. In this paper however we focus on the application of this metric to archival and non-archival text data.
利用模型聚类评价主题质量
主题建模作为一种查找隐藏模式以及对新类型的文本和非文本数据集合进行分组的流行技术继续发展。近年来,在开发用于评估主题模型及其生成的主题质量的度量和技术方面的工作越来越多。对于文本数据来说尤其如此,其中使用连贯性等措施对主题的语义可解释性给予了极大的关注。然而,研究表明,基于一致性指标的主题评估并不总是与人类的判断很好地一致。其他的研究也考察了信息论距离度量在评价与语义可解释性相关的主题质量方面的效用。尽管在评估主题的可解释性方面已经取得了进展,但现有的内在评估指标并没有解决主题建模中关注的一些其他方面,例如:选择主题的数量,从不同模型中对齐主题的能力,以及评估训练数据的质量。在这里,我们提出了一个替代度量来描述主题质量,它解决了上述三个问题。我们的方法是基于聚类主题,并使用剪影测量,一个流行的聚类指数,表征主题的质量。我们将说明此方法在解决上面提到的其他主题建模问题方面的实用性。由于这个指标并不关注可解释性,我们相信它可以更广泛地应用于文本和非文本数据。然而,在本文中,我们重点研究了该度量在档案和非档案文本数据中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信