Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tanasescu Kesarwani & Inkpen FLAIRS - 31 Deep Learning Poetic Metaphor Detection and Classification
Tanasescu Kesarwani & Inkpen FLAIRS - 31 Deep Learning Poetic Metaphor Detection and Classification
• The issue of data in literature and poetry; from big data to data-
intensive approaches.
The Quantitative-Qualitative Components. DH &
Deep Learning
• In the existing work it is true that the magnitude of the explored
data is relative and not necessarily consequential in terms of
quality of results;
• 1. genre-related;
• The best result, i.e., F-score 0.833 for metaphor and F-score
0.744 for the non-metaphor class was seen with epochs 300,
batch 70, neurons 206 and inputs 103.
• It can be observed that with the same training and test set, CNN
performed significantly better than SVM and other machine
learning algorithms. The best F-score for metaphor class was
0.781, seen with SVM with Puk kernel. For CNN, we get a gain
of 5.2% and we get a high F-score of 0.833.
• For the non-metaphor class, KNN obtained a F-score of 0.711.
For CNN, we get a gain of 3.3% and we get a higher F-score of
0.744.
• For both classes, the performance is better with CNN.
Discussion of Results (II)
• Questions, comments?
• http://artsites.uottawa.ca/margento/en/the-graph-poem/
(The Graph Poem webpage @ uOttawa)
• http://bit.ly/2KDIY6F
(Kesarwani’s thesis)
Contact: ctanase2@uottawa.ca
Diana.Inkpen@uottawa.ca