This is not the latest version of this item. The latest version can be found here.
Topic-Modeling- and Subject-Classification-Analyses of Articles from the EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing
Loading...
Files
Date
2019-10-09
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Description
This data set contains the results of topic-modeling- and subject-
classification-analyses of the abstracts of 87 articles from the EURASIP
Journal on Advances in Signal Processing (ISSN: 1687-6180). All of the
selected articles had in common that they were assigned the keyword “OFDM”
(Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing) by the authors or the publisher.
The topic modeling analyses were carried out with the program GibbsLDA++
(<http://gibbslda.sourceforge.net>) once with and once without stemming
(model-final.twords_w_stemming.txt and model-final.twords_wo_stemming.txt,
respectively). The program parameters were set to: src/lda -est -alpha 0.5
-beta 0.1 -ntopics 10 -niters 1000 -savestep 100 -twords 20
The subject classification analyses were carried out with the web-application
Annif.org (<http://annif.org/>), which offers different algorithms for the
classification. The following algorithms were used (the name of the
corresponding result file is given in brackets): Annif prototype API English
(Annif.png), fastText English (fastText.png), Maui English (Maui.png), TF-IDF
English (TF-IDF.png), YSO ensemble English (YSO.png).
A list with the DOIs of the articles can be found in the file
"DOIs_analyzed_articles.txt" and the analyzed abstracts of these articles in
the zip archive "Abstracts_EURASIPJAdvSignalProcess.zip".
Citation
Endorsement
Project(s)
Faculty
Collections
License
Except where otherwise noted, this license is described as CC BY 4.0 - Attribution 4.0 International
Version History
You are currently viewing version no. 1 of the item. A more recent version is available.
1 - 2 of 2
Version | Date | Summary |
---|---|---|
2019-11-26 13:11:16 | We repeated the TDM analyses because we had noticed that at least 7 of the 87 abstracts analyzed had been incomplete in the first version of the dataset. A more detailed error description can be found in the description section of the new version. | |
1* | 2019-10-09 14:51:54 |
* Selected version