Top Banner
Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL) University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign THE ANDREW W. MELLON FOUNDATION
17

Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Dec 16, 2015

Download

Documents

Godfrey Goodman
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II

J. Stephen Downie, Xiao HuThe International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab

(IMIRSEL)

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

THE ANDREW W. MELLON FOUNDATION

Page 2: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Background & Motivation

ClassifyReviews

Identify User Descriptions

Connect toObjects

CustomerReviews

Epinions.com

Positive

Negative

Description 1Description 1Description 1Description 1

Description 1Description 1Description 1Description 1

D1 D2 D3

D1 D2 D3

Phase IIPhase I Future

Page 3: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Review mining: phase I

Page 4: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Phase IIMining frequent descriptive patterns in positive and negative reviews

Reviews Positive NegativeTotal Reviews 400 400

Total Sentences 63118 30053

Total Words 1027713 447603

Avg. (STD ) sentences per review 157.80 (75.49) 75.13 (41.62)

Avg. (STD) words per sentence 16.28 (14.43) 14.89 (12.24)

sets of words used by users to express feelings/opinions

Page 5: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Frequent Descriptive Pattern Mining (FDPM)Finds patterns consisting of items that frequently

occur together in individual transactions Items = candidate descriptive words (terms)

= adjectives, adverbs and verbs, no nounsTransactions = review sentences

Items

Transactions

Page 6: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Data/Text-to-Knowledge (D2K/T2K) Toolkits

POS tagging

Frequent pattern mining

Page 7: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Findings

Digging deeper and deeper to find out what makes good things good and bad things bad….

Page 8: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Single term patterns

Positive Reviews Negative Reviews

not – 3417 sentencesgood – 1621 sentences:

1/4 of all sentences

not – 1915 sentencesgood – 1025 sentences:

1/3 of all sentencesGood = Bad?!

Page 9: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

good in a negative context Negation: “Nothing is good.”

“It just doesn't sound good.”Song titles:

“Good Charlotte, you make me so mad.”“Feels So Good is dated and reprehensibly bad.”

Rhetoric: “And this is a good ruiner: …” “What a waste of my good two dollars…”

Faint praise: “…the only good thing… is the

packaging.” Expressions:

“You all have heard … the good old cliché.”

Page 10: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Double term patterns

Positive Reviews

Negative Reviews

not good not realli

realli good not listen not great

not goodnot badnot reallinot soundrealli good

Good Bad?!

Page 11: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Triple term patternsPositive Reviews Negative

Reviews

sing open melodsing smooth melodsing fill melodsing smooth opennot realli goodsing lead melodsound realli goodsing plai melodaccompani sing melodsing soft melod

not realli goodnot realli listen bad not good bad not sound pretti tight spitbad not don’trealli not don’trealli bad notpretti bad notnot sing sound

Page 12: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Comparison to an earlier study

Cunningham et al. "The Pain, The Pain": Modeling music information behavior and the songs we hate. In Proc. of ISMIR ’05

What is the worst song ever?

Page 13: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Comparison to an earlier studyThis Study Cunningham et al

‘05

bad really

annoying bad

hate worst

really annoying

inane boring

horrible horrible

stupid awful

worst hate

awful stupid

crap crap

bore inane

Page 14: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Conclusions

Triple-term patterns necessary: Need to dig deeper to capture users’

emotional orientation/feelings toward music objects

Findings consistent with earlier workCustomer reviews are an excellent

resource for studying the underlying intentions and contributing features of user-generated metadata

Page 15: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Future work

Non-music cases Criticism mining on book and movie

reviews Other facets of music reviews

Recommended usage metadataOther feature studies

Stylistics in customer reviews Naïve Bayesian feature ranking Noun pattern mining in different genres

Page 16: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

Questions?

Thank you!

THE ANDREW W. MELLON FOUNDATION

Page 17: Review Mining for Music Digital Libraries: Phase II J. Stephen Downie, Xiao Hu The International Music Information Retrieval Systems Evaluation Lab (IMIRSEL)

References

Han, J., Pei, J., and Yin, Y. Mining frequent patterns without candidate generation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD 2000. 1-12. 

Hu, X., Downie J.S., West K., and Ehmann A. Mining Music Reviews: Promising Preliminary Results. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Music Information Retrieval. 2005, 536-539.

Welge, M., et al. Data to Knowledge (D2K) An Automated Learning Group Report. NCSA, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2003. (http://alg.ncsa.uiuc.edu)