人类阅读能否验证主题模型?

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Bolun Zhang, Yimang Zhou, Dai Li
{"title":"人类阅读能否验证主题模型?","authors":"Bolun Zhang, Yimang Zhou, Dai Li","doi":"10.1177/00811750241265336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Validation is at the heart of methodological discussions about topic modeling. The authors argue that validation based on human reading hinges on distinctive words and readers’ labeling of a topic, and it overlooks the probability of conflicting results from semantically similar models, such as regressions or other methods. This runs counter to the presumption that topic modeling can reveal features of documents that have some measurable association with social aspects outside the text. The authors develop a similar topic identifying procedure to verify that semantically similar solutions yield similar results in further analysis. The authors argue that future validations of topic modeling must consider such procedures.","PeriodicalId":48140,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methodology","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model?\",\"authors\":\"Bolun Zhang, Yimang Zhou, Dai Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00811750241265336\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Validation is at the heart of methodological discussions about topic modeling. The authors argue that validation based on human reading hinges on distinctive words and readers’ labeling of a topic, and it overlooks the probability of conflicting results from semantically similar models, such as regressions or other methods. This runs counter to the presumption that topic modeling can reveal features of documents that have some measurable association with social aspects outside the text. The authors develop a similar topic identifying procedure to verify that semantically similar solutions yield similar results in further analysis. The authors argue that future validations of topic modeling must consider such procedures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00811750241265336\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00811750241265336","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

验证是主题建模方法论讨论的核心。作者认为,基于人类阅读的验证依赖于独特的词语和读者对主题的标签,它忽略了语义相似的模型(如回归或其他方法)可能产生的相互矛盾的结果。这与主题建模可以揭示文档特征的假设背道而驰,因为文档特征与文本之外的社会方面存在某种可衡量的关联。作者开发了一个类似的主题识别程序,以验证语义相似的解决方案在进一步分析中是否会产生相似的结果。作者认为,未来对主题建模的验证必须考虑这种程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model?
Validation is at the heart of methodological discussions about topic modeling. The authors argue that validation based on human reading hinges on distinctive words and readers’ labeling of a topic, and it overlooks the probability of conflicting results from semantically similar models, such as regressions or other methods. This runs counter to the presumption that topic modeling can reveal features of documents that have some measurable association with social aspects outside the text. The authors develop a similar topic identifying procedure to verify that semantically similar solutions yield similar results in further analysis. The authors argue that future validations of topic modeling must consider such procedures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Sociological Methodology is a compendium of new and sometimes controversial advances in social science methodology. Contributions come from diverse areas and have something useful -- and often surprising -- to say about a wide range of topics ranging from legal and ethical issues surrounding data collection to the methodology of theory construction. In short, Sociological Methodology holds something of value -- and an interesting mix of lively controversy, too -- for nearly everyone who participates in the enterprise of sociological research.
×
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