Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2019
DOI: 10.1145/3295823
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gaussian Processes for Rumour Stance Classification in Social Media

Abstract: Social media tend to be rife with rumours while new reports are released piecemeal during breaking news. Interestingly, one can mine multiple reactions expressed by social media users in those situations, exploring their stance towards rumours, ultimately enabling the flagging of highly disputed rumours as being potentially false. In this work, we set out to develop an automated, supervised classifier that uses multi-task learning to classify the stance expressed in each individual tweet in a rumourous convers… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
40
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(34 reference statements)
1
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on their experimentation and coded dataset, they are able to achieve an accuracy of over 88% in classifying rumour stances in crisis-related posts; here, random forest models result in the best performance. Lukasik et al, [26,27] designed a novel approach based on Gaussian Processes. They explored its effectiveness on two datasets with varying distributions of stances.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on their experimentation and coded dataset, they are able to achieve an accuracy of over 88% in classifying rumour stances in crisis-related posts; here, random forest models result in the best performance. Lukasik et al, [26,27] designed a novel approach based on Gaussian Processes. They explored its effectiveness on two datasets with varying distributions of stances.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Deep semantics Ma et al 2016Ma et al 2018Wu et al 2018Reis et al 2019Rashkin et al 2017Martin et al 2018Tseng et al 1999Karimi et al 2018Long et al 2017Shu et al 2019 Profiles Influence Interests Yang et al 2018Ghenai et al 2018 Dynamic networks Static networks Jin et al 2016Tacchini et al 2017Ma et al 2017Ruchansky et al 2017Wu et al 2018 Stance-based Ma et al 2018Lukasik et al 2019 Meta-data based Figure 2. The review of information credibility evaluation methods Wu et al, 2019a).…”
Section: Shallow Semanticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, we aim to classify the stance of tweets towards rumours that emerge while breaking news stories unfold; these rumours are unlikely to have been observed before and hence rumours from previously observed events, which are likely to diverge, need to be used for training. As far as we know, only work by Lukasik et al [30,32,18] has tackled stance classification in the context of breaking news stories applied to new rumours. Zeng et al [33] have also performed stance classification for rumours around breaking news stories, but overlapping rumours were used for training and testing.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%