The amount of data produced significantly increased with the development of Internet technologies. Accordingly, the importance of natural language processing studies increased, and this topic became one of the most studied artificial intelligence subjects. Even though it is a popular topic that is widely studied on, not enough studies have been conducted on the Turkish language. Even the studies conducted in Turkey are primarily on English and other natural languages instead of Turkish. The lack of a Turkish dataset is the most crucial reason for the lack of studies. Therefore, to create a solution, user reviews on e-commerce websites were collected and labelled reviews as positive, negative and neutral, and a new and unique dataset consisting of 150,000 reviews was created. This dataset was named TRSAv1, which was publicly shared with the researchers will contribute to the Turkish natural language processing studies; however, the effect of different word representation methods on algorithm performance was examined in detail, and the results were compared.
AydoğanMKarciA.Spam mail detection using naive Bayes method with apache spark. In: IDAP international conference on artificial intelligence and data processing, Malatya, Turkey, 28–30 September 2018, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
2.
KılınçDÖzçiftABozyigitFet al. TTC-3600: a new benchmark dataset for Turkish text categorization. J Inf Sci2017; 43(2): 174–185.
3.
TocogluMAAlpkocakA.TREMO: a dataset for emotion analysis in Turkish. J Inf Sci2018; 44(6): 848–860.
4.
KaynarOArslanHGörmezYet al. Makine Öğrenmesi Yöntemleri ile Duygu Analizi. In: International artificial intelligence and data processing symposium (IDAP), Malatya, Turkey, 16–17 September 2017, pp. 1–5. New York: IEEE.
5.
ÇobanÖ. Turkish Twitter sentiment analysis using text classification techniques. Master Thesis, Atatürk Üniversity, Erzurum, Turkey, 2016.
6.
VelioğluRYıldızTYıldırımS. Sentiment analysis using learning approaches over emojis for Turkish tweets. In: 3rd international conference on computer science and application engineering, Sanya, China, 20–23 September 2018.
7.
TocogluMAOzturkmenogluOAlpkocakA.Emotion analysis from Turkish tweets using deep neural networks. IEEE Access2019; 7: 183061–183069.
8.
FangXZhanJ.Sentiment analysis using product review data. J Big Data2015; 2(1): 5.
9.
ZhouCSunCLiuZet al. A C-LSTM neural network for text classification on movie reviews using the Stanford Sentiment Treebank, https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.08630
10.
AkgülESErtanoCDiriB.Sentiment analysis with Twitter. Pamukkale Univ J Eng Sci2016; 22(2): 106–110.
11.
TürkmenACemgilT.Political interest and tendency prediction from microblog data. In: 22nd signal processing and communications applications conference (SIU), Trabzon, Turkey, 23–25 April 2014, pp. 1327–1330. New York: IEEE.
12.
Sevindiİ. Comparison of supervised and dictionary based sentiment analysis approaches on Turkish text. Master Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey, 2013.
13.
ErogulU.Sentiment analysis in Turkish. Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, 2009.
14.
MeralMDiriB. Sentiment analysis on Twitter. In: 22nd signal processing and communications applications conference (SIU), Trabzon, Turkey, 23–25 April 2014.
15.
NizamHAkınSS.Sosyal medyada makine öğrenmesi ile duygu analizinde dengeli ve dengesiz veri setlerinin performanslarının karşılaştırılması. In: XIX. Türkiye’de İnternet Konferansı, İzmir, Turkey, 27–29 October 2014, pp. 1–6, http://inet-tr.org.tr/inetconf19/bildiri/10.pdf
16.
UçkanTHarkCKarciA.SSC: clustering of Turkish texts by spectral graph partitioning. Politeknik Dergisi2021; 24: 1433–1444.
EryigitGCetinFSYanıkMet al. Turksent: a sentiment annotation tool for social media. In: Proceedings of the 7th linguistic annotation workshop and interoperability with discourse, Sofia, 8–9 August 2013, pp. 131–134. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
HarkCKarcıA.Karcı summarization: a simple and effective approach for automatic text summarization using Karcı entropy. Inf Proces Manag2020; 57(3): 102187.
AydoğanMKarciA.Kelime Temsil Yöntemleri ile Kelime Benzerliklerinin İncelenmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlik Fakültesi Dergisi2019; 34(2): 181–196.
27.
RiegerBB. Distributed semantic representation of word meanings. In: Workshop on parallel processing: Logic, organization, and technology, Kreuth, 24–28 July 1989, pp. 243–273. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.
28.
ColéPBeauvillainCSeguiJ.On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: a differential frequency effect. J Memory Lang1989; 28(1): 1–13.
29.
ModellJGoodmanM.Historical perspective. In: FeldmanSSElliottGR (eds) At the threshold: The developing adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990, pp. 93–122.
30.
WuHSaltonG. A comparison of search term weighting: term relevance vs. inverse document frequency. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Information storage and retrieval: theoretical issues in information retrieval, New York, 31 May–2 June 1981, pp. 30–39. New York: ACM.
31.
MikolovTChenKCorradoGet al. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. In: Proceedings of Workshop at ICLR 2013, Scottsdale, AZ, 2–4 May.
32.
LeQMikolovT. Distributed representations of sentences and documents. In: 31st international conference on machine learning, Beijing, China, 21–26 June 2014.
33.
PenningtonJSocherRManningC. Glove: global vectors for word representation. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), Doha, Qatar, 25–29 October 2014, pp. 1532–1543. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
34.
BrochierRGuilleAVelcinJ. Global vectors for node representations. In: The world wide web conference, San Francisco, CA, 13–17 May 2019, pp. 2587–2593. New York: ACM.
35.
JoulinAGraveEBojanowskiPet al. Bag of tricks for efficient text classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.01759, 2016.
36.
TingSLIpWHTsangAH.Is Naive Bayes a good classifier for document classification. Int J Softw Eng Appl2011; 5(3): 37–46.
37.
TollesJMeurerW.Logistic regression relating patient characteristics to outcomes. JAMA2016; 316(5): 533–534.
38.
QuinlanJR.Simplifying decision trees. Int J Man-Mach Stud1987; 27(3): 221–234.
39.
BoserEGuyonMVladimirN. A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Proceedings of the fifth annual workshop on computational learning theory, Pittsburgh, PA, 27–29 July 1992.
RosenblattF.The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychol Rev1958; 65(6): 386.
44.
WilliamsJGeoffreyEDavidE.Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature1986; 323(6088): 533–536.
45.
LaiSXuLLiuKet al. Recurrent convolutional neural networks for text classification. In: AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, Austin, TX, 25–30 January 2015, pp. 2267–2273.
46.
LiuPQiuXHuangX.Recurrent neural network for text classification with multi-task learning. arXiv preprint, 2016, https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.05101
47.
SchusterMPaliwalKK.Bidirectional recurrent neural networks. IEEE Trans Signal Process1997; 45(11): 2673–2681.
48.
KrizhevskyASutskeverIHintonGE.Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: 26th annual conference on neural information processing systems, Lake Tahoe, NV, 5–10 December 2013.
49.
LawrenceSGilesCLTsoiACet al. Face recognition: a convolutional neural-network approach. IEEE T Neural Netw1997; 8(1): 98–113.
50.
HuBLuZLiHet al. Convolutional neural network architectures for matching natural language sentences. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 8–13 December 2014.
LiwickiMGravesAFernàndezSet al. A novel approach to online handwriting recognition based on bidirectional long short-term memory networks. In: 9th international conference on document analysis and recognition, Curitiba, Brazil, 23–26 September 2007.
53.
SainathTVinyalsOSeniorAet al. Convolutional, long short-term memory, fully connected deep neural networks. In: IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 19–24 April 2015.
54.
WeningerFGeigerJWöllmerMet al. BLSTM speech enhancement and recognition for reverberated multisource environments. In: Machine listening in multisource environments, Florence, 1 September 2011.
55.
WöllmerMEybenFSchullerBet al. A multi-stream ASR framework for BLSTM modeling of conversational speech. In: IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing, Prague, 22–27 May 2011.
56.
GeigerJZhangZWeningerFet al. Robust speech recognition using long short-term memory recurrent neural networks for hybrid acoustic modelling. In: 15th annual conference of the international speech communication association, Singapore, 14–18 September 2014.
57.
ChoKVan MoerBGulcehreCet al. Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation. arXiv:1406.1078, 2014.
58.
FelixGJürgenSFredC. Learning to forget: continual prediction with LSTM. In: 9th international conference on artificial neural networks, ICANN’99, Edinburgh, 7–10 September 1999, pp. 850–855. New York: IEEE.
59.
RavanelliMBrakelPOmologoMet al. Light gated recurrent units for speech recognition. IEEE T Emerg Top Comput Intell2018; 2(2): 92–102.
