It was not until 2010 when businesses, politicians and people in general began to realize the potential of Twitter in Spain. This fact has awoken research interest in the extraction of knowledge from Twitter. This paper aims to fill the gap of the lack of resources for Twitter sentiment analysis in Spanish by performing a study of different features and machine learning algorithms for classifying the polarity of Twitter posts. The result is a new corpus of Spanish tweets called COST, and we have carried out a wide-ranging experiment in which different machine learning algorithms have been used. Furthermore, we have tested the influence of using different weighting schemes for unigrams, the influence of eliminating stop-words and the application of a stemmer process.
DasSChenM. Yahoo! for Amazon: Extracting market sentiment from stock message boards. In: Asia Pacific Finance Association annual conference (APFA), 2001.
2.
PangBLeeLVaithyanathanS. Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), 2002, pp. 79–86.
3.
TurneyPD. Thumbs up or thumbs down?: Semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In: Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002, pp. 417–424.
4.
PrabowoRThelwallM. Sentiment analysis: A combined approach. Journal of Informetrics2009; 3(2): 143–157.
5.
PangBLeeL. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundation for Trends in Information Retrieval2008; 2(1–2).
6.
LiuB. Sentiment analysis and subjectivity. In: Handbook of natural language processing, 2nd edn.London: Chapman and Hall, 2010.
7.
CambriaESchullerBXiaYHavasiC. New avenues in opinion mining and sentiment analysis. IEEE Intellligent Systems2013; 28(2): 15–21.
8.
AhmadKChengDAlmasY. Multi-lingual sentiment analysis of financial news streams. In: Proceedings of science, GRID, 2006.
9.
DeneckeK. Using SentiWordNet for multilingual sentiment analysis. In: IEEE 24th international conference: Data engineering workshop, 2008. ICDEW, 7–12 April 2008, Cancun, pp. 507–512.
10.
AbbasiAChenHSalemA. Sentiment analysis in multiple languages: Feature selection for opinion classification in web forums. ACM Transactions on Information.Systems2008; 26(3): 12:1–12:34.
11.
ZhangCZengDLiJ. Sentiment analysis of Chinese documents: From sentence to document level. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology2009; 60(12): 2474–2487.
12.
BoldriniEBalahurAMartínez-BarcoPMontoyoA. EmotiBlog: A fine-grained model for emotion detection in non-traditional textual genres. WOMSA2009; 22–31.
13.
GhorbelHJacotD. Sentiment analysis of French movie reviews. Advances in Distributed Agent-Based Retrieval Tools2011; 361: 97–108.
14.
EsuliASebastianiF. SentiWordNet: A publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In: Proceedings of the 5th conference on language resources and evaluation, 2006, pp. 417–422.
15.
AgićŽLjubešićNTadićM. Towards sentiment analysis of financial texts in croatian. In: Proceedings of the seventh conference on international language resources and evaluation, 2010.
16.
Martínez-CámaraEMartin-ValdiviaMTUreña-LopezLAMontejo-RaezA. Sentiment analysis in Twitter. Natural Language Engineering2014; 20(1): 1–28.
17.
PetrovićSOsborneMLavrenkoV. The Edinburgh Twitter corpus. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the NAACL HLT 2010 workshop on computational linguistics in a world of social media, 2010; 25–26.
18.
PakAParoubekP. Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation, 2010.
ReadJ. Using emoticons to reduce dependency in machine learning techniques for sentiment classification. In: Proceedings of the ACL student research workshop, 2005, pp. 43–48.
21.
JansenBJZhangMSobelKChowduryA. Micro-blogging as online word of mouth branding. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, 2009, pp. 3859–3864.
22.
OussalahMBhatFChallisKSchnierT. A software architecture for Twitter collection, search and geolocation services. Knowledge-Based Systems2013; 37: 105–120.
23.
TumasjanASprengerTSandnerPWelpeI. Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In: Proceedings of the ICWMS, 2010.
24.
JungherrAJürgensPSchoenH. Why the Pirate Party won the German elections of 2009 or the rouble with predictions: A response to Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, To. O., Sander, P. G., and Welpe, I. M. ‘Predicting elections with Twitter: what 140 characters reveal about political sentiment’. Social Science Computer Review2012; 30(2): 229–234.
25.
O’ConnorBBalasubramanyanRRoutledgeBSmithN. From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In: Proceedings of the ICWMS, 2010.
26.
DiakopoulosNAShammaDA. Characterizing debate performance via aggregated Twitter sentiment. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems, 2010; 1195–1198.
27.
RillSReinelDScheidtJZicariRV. PoliTwi: Early detection of emerging political topics on Twitter and the impact on concept-level sentiment analysis. Knowledge-Based Systems2014, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.05.008
Villena-RománJLana-SerranoSMartínez-CámaraEGonzález-CristóbalJC. TASS – Workshop on sentiment analysis at SEPLN. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural2013; 50: 37–44.
30.
PlaFHurtadoLF. Sentiment analysis in Twitter for Spanish. Natural Language Processing and Information Systems2014; 8455: 208–213.
31.
VilaresDAlonsoMAGómez-RodríguezC. On the usefulness of lexical and syntactic processing in polarity classification of Twitter messages. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology2015, in press.
32.
ManningCDSchützeH and MITCogNet. Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
33.
SebastianiF. Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Computer Survey2002; 34(1): 1–47.
34.
SaltonGMcGillMJ. Introduction to modern information retrieval. New York: McGraw–Hill, 1986.
35.
VapnikVN. The nature of statistical learning theory. New York: Springer, 1995.
36.
HosmerDWLemeshowS. Applied logistic regression. Probability and Statistics Series. Chichester: Wiley, 2000.
TanSZhangJ. An empirical study of sentiment analysis for chinese documents. Expert Systems with Applications2008; 34(4): 2622–2629.
39.
LewisD. Naive (Bayes) at forty: The independence assumption in information retrieval. In: Machine Learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1398. Berlin: Springer, 1998; 4–15.
40.
DomingosPPazzaniM. On the optimality of the simple bayesian classifier under zero–one loss. Machine Learning1997; 29(2): 103–130.
41.
PorterM. Snowball: A Language for Stemming Algorithms, 2001.
42.
BaccianellaSEsuliASebastianiF. SentiWordNet 3.0: An enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: Proceedings of the seventh conference on international language resources and evaluation, 2010.
