2020
DOI: 10.1007/s00146-020-01011-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Attention-based convolutional neural network for Bangla sentiment analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figures [8][9][10][11] show all comparative experiments and the experimental results of the method in this paper on the correct rate, recall rate, F 1 value and average results of positive, neutral and negative blog posts. e performance of method 3 is the most unsatisfactory.…”
Section: Comparison Of Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figures [8][9][10][11] show all comparative experiments and the experimental results of the method in this paper on the correct rate, recall rate, F 1 value and average results of positive, neutral and negative blog posts. e performance of method 3 is the most unsatisfactory.…”
Section: Comparison Of Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CNN can effectively integrate multimodal information [11,12], which improves the sentiment analysis of the long text by increasing the convolutional layers [13]. In addition, the LSTM network pays attention to the semantic environment where the sentiment words are located [14].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both corpus labelled into positive and negative sentiment polarities. A recent study developed a dataset for sentiment analysis which contained 2979 Bengali reviews and comments [ 37 ]. This dataset was annotated with positive, negative, and neutral polarities.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing datasets for sentiment analysis for a low-resource language like Bangla suffer from three major limitations: 1) none to slight inter annotator agreement score questioning the annotation reliability (e.g., 0.11 in Ashik et al, 2019 and0.18 in Islam et al, 2020), 2) lack of cross-domain generalization capability due to large domain dependency (Wahid et al, 2019;Rahman et al, 2019;Sazzed, 2020), and 3) lack of public availability for further research (Karim et al, 2020;Nabi et al, 2016;Hassan et al, 2016;Sharmin and Chakma, 2020;Choudhary et al, 2018;Das and Bandyopadhyay, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%