I have huge text data. My entire database is text format in UTF-8
I need to have list of most repeated phrase on my whole text data.
For example my desire output something like this:
{
'a': 423412341,
'this': 423412341,
'is': 322472341,
'this is': 222472341,
'this is a': 122472341,
'this is a my': 5235634
}
Process and store each phrase take huge size of database.
For example store in MySQL or MongoDB.
Question is is there any more efficient database or alghorithm for find this result ?
Solr, Elasticsearch or etc ...
I think i have max 10 words in each phrase can be good for me.
I'd suggest combining ideas from two fields, here: Streaming Algorithms, and the Apriori Algorithm From Market-Basket Analysis.
Let's start with the problem of finding the k most frequent single words without loading the entire corpus into memory. A very simple algorithm, Sampling (see Finding Frequent Items in Data Streams]), can do so very easily. Moreover, it is very amenable to parallel implementation (described below). There is a plethora of work on top-k queries, including some on distributed versions (see, e.g., Efficient Top-K Query Calculation in Distributed Networks).
Now to the problem of k most frequent phrases (of possibly multiple phrases). Clearly, the most frequent phrases of length l + 1 must contain the most frequent phrases of length l as a prefix, as appending a word to a phrase cannot increase its popularity. Hence, once you have the k most frequent single words, you can scan the corpus for only them (which is faster) to build the most frequent phrases of length 2. Using this, you can build the most frequent phrases of length 3, and so on. The stopping condition is when a phrase of length l + 1 does not evict any phrase of length l.
A Short Description of The Sampling Algorithm
This is a very simple algorithm which will, with high probability, find the top k items out of those having frequency at least f. It operates in two stages: the first finds candidate elements, and the second counts them.
In the first stage, randomly select ~ log(n) / f words from the corpus (note that this is much less than n). With high probability, all your desired words appear in the set of these words.
In the second stage, maintain a dictionary of the counts of these candidate elements; scan the corpus, and count the occurrences.
Output the top k of the items resulting from the second stage.
Note that the second stage is very amenable to parallel implementation. If you partition the text into different segments, and count the occurrences in each segment, you can easily combine the dictionaries at the end.
If you can store the data in Apache Solr, then the Luke Request Handler could be used to find the most common phrases. Example query:
http://127.0.0.1:8983/solr/admin/luke?fl=fulltext&numTerms=100
Additionally, the Terms Component may help find the most common individual words. Here is an article about Self Updating Solr Stopwords which uses the Terms Component to find the 100 most common indexed words and add them to the Stopwords file. Example query:
http://127.0.0.1:8983/solr/terms?terms.fl=fulltext&terms.limit=100
Have you considered using MapReduce?
Assuming you have access to a proper infrastructure, this seems to be a clear fit for it. You will need a tokenizer that splits lines into multi-word tokens up to 10 words. I don't think that's a big deal. The outcome from the MR job will be token -> frequency pairs, which you can pass to another job to sort them on the frequencies (one option). I would suggest to read up on Hadoop/MapReduce before considering other solutions. You may also use HBase to store any intermediary outputs.
Original paper on MapReduce by Google.
tokenize it by 1 to 10 words and insert into 10 SQL tables by token lengths. Make sure to use hash index on the column with string tokens. Then just call SELECT token,COUNT(*) FROM tablename GROUP BY token on each table and dump results somewhere and wait.
EDIT: that would be infeasible for large datasets, just for each N-gram update the count by +1 or insert new row into table (in MYSQL would be useful query INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE). You should definitely still use hash indexes, though.
After that just sort by number of occurences and merge data from these 10 tables (you could do that in single step, but that would put more strain on memory).
Be wary of heuristic methods like suggested by Ami Tavory, if you select wrong parameters, you can get wrong results (flaw of sampling algorithm can be seen on some classic terms or phrases - e.g. "habeas corpus" - neither habeas nor corpus will be selected as frequent by itself, but as a 2 word phrase it may very well rank higher than some phrases you get by appending/prepending to common word). There is surely no need to use them for tokens of lesser length, you could use them only when classic methods fail (take too much time or memory).
The top answer by Amy Tavori states:
Clearly, the most frequent phrases of length l + 1 must contain the most frequent phrases of length l as a prefix, as appending a word to a phrase cannot increase its popularity.
While it is true that appending a word to a phrase cannot increase its popularity, there is no reason to assume that the frequency of 2-grams are bounded by the frequency of 1-grams. To illustrate, consider the following corpus (constructed specifically to illustrate this point):
Here, a tricksy corpus will exist; a very strange, a sometimes cryptic corpus will dumbfound you maybe, perhaps a bit; in particular since my tricksy corpus will not match the pattern you expect from it; nor will it look like a fish, a boat, a sunflower, or a very handsome kitten. The tricksy corpus will surprise a user named Ami Tavory; this tricksy corpus will be fun to follow a year or a month or a minute from now.
Looking at the most frequent single words, we get:
1-Gram Frequency
------ ---------
a 12
will 6
corpus 5
tricksy 4
or 3
from 2
it 2
the 2
very 2
you 2
The method suggested by Ami Tavori would identify the top 1-gram, 'a', and narrow the search to 2-grams with the prefix 'a'. But looking at the corpus from before, the top 2-grams are:
2-Gram Frequency
------ ---------
corpus will 5
tricksy corpus 4
or a 3
a very 2
And moving on to 3-grams, there is only a single repeated 3-gram in the entire corpus, namely:
3-Gram Frequency
------ ---------
tricksy corpus will 4
To generalize: you can't use the top m-grams to extrapolate directly to top (m+1)-grams. What you can do is throw away the bottom m-grams, specifically the ones which do not repeat at all, and look at all the ones that do. That narrows the field a bit.
This can be simplified greatly. You don't need a database at all. Just store the full text in a file. Then write a PHP script to open and read the file contents. Use the PHP regex function to extract matches. Keep the total in a global variable. Write the results to another file. That's it.
Related
I have just started a project in NLP. Suppose I have a graph for each word that shows the polarity distribution of sentiments for that word in different sentences. I want to know what I can use to recognize the feelings of new words? Any other use you have in mind I will be happy to share.
I apologize for any possible errors in my writing. Thanks a lot
Assuming you've got some words that have been hand-labeled with positive/negative sentiments, but then you encounter some new words that aren't labeled:
If you encounter the new words totally alone, outside of contexts, there's not much you can do. (Maybe, you could go out to try to find extra texts with those new words, such as vis dictionaries or the web, then use those larger texts in the next approach.)
If you encounter the new words inside texts that also include some of your hand-labeled words, you could try guessing that the new words are most like the words you already know that are closest-to, or used-in-the-same-places. This would leverage what's called "the distributional hypothesis" – words with similar distributions have similar meanings – that underlies a lot of computer natural-language analysis, including word2vec.
One simple thing to try along these lines: across all your texts, for every unknown word U, tally up the counts all neighboring words within N positions. (N could be 1, or larger.) From that, pick the top 5 words occuring most often near the unknown word, and look up your prior labels, and avergae them together (perhaps weighted by the number of occurrences.)
You'll then have a number for the new word.
Alternatively, you could train a word2vec set-of-word-vectors for all of your texts, including the unknown & know words. Then, ask that model for the N most-similar neighbors to your unknown word. (Again, N could be small or large.) Then, from among those neighbors with known labels, average them together (again perhaps weighted by similarity), to get a number for the previously unknown word.
I wouldn't particularly expect either of these techniques to work very well. The idea that individual words can have specific sentiment is somewhat weak given the way that in actual language, their meaning is heavily modified, or even reversed, by the surrounding grammar/context. But in each case these simple calculate-from-neighbors techniqyes are probably better than random guesses.
If your real aim is to calculate the overall sentiment of longer texts, like sentences, paragraphs, reviews, etc, then you should discard your labels of individual words an acquire/create labels for full texts, and apply real text-classification techniques to those larger texts. A simple word-by-word approach won't do very well compared to other techniques – as long as those techniques have plenty of labeled training data.
I'm conducting topic modeling analysis on messages from public Telegram groups, super new to this area so just learning.
I've been following this example here (https://towardsdatascience.com/topic-modeling-with-bert-779f7db187e6), and tried swapping out the HDBSCAN clustering algorithm with the one in BERT's documentation util.community_detection (https://www.sbert.net/docs/package_reference/util.html).
When I output the results of the clusters in this example (4899 Telegram messages), I get something that looks like this.
Topic: just a cluster label
Doc: all the messages in that cluster combined together
0: top keywords found via tf-idf
The problem I'm concerned with is that, there are clearly a ton of messages that are basically identical to each other, I've marked them in yellow. A few examples,
Cluster 3: this is just a bunch of "hellos" and variations thereof
Cluster 5: this is just a bunch of "Ok"s, people saying yes / ok
Cluster 7: people just saying thanks and variations on that
Cluster 9: some variations and misspellings of the word "gas"
Cluster 19: just "siap" which I think means "sorry if I already posted"
To a human reader I feel like this type of text should just be excluded from the analysis altogether, the question is how do I detect it.
Since they're already grouped together by the clustering algorithm, the algorithm must have ways to measure the "similarity" between these messages within a cluster. But I don't seem to be able to find these values exposed anywhere or what it's called. Like for example the HDBSCAN algorithm (https://hdbscan.readthedocs.io/en/latest/basic_hdbscan.html#), I skimmed through the doc a few times and didn't find any such property or measure exposed, am I missing something here?
My hypothesis is that for the cases where it's just a word or a short phrase repeated over and over again, this similarity value must be super super high, and I'd just say "clusters whose internal similarity is higher than this threshold are getting thrown out".
Any help & advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks!
Index the corpus of your interest (for e.g. FAISS) just for an idea, example code is below:
def build_index(self):
""":returns an inverted index for the search documents"""
vectors = [self.encode(document) for document in self.documents]
index = faiss.IndexIDMap(faiss.IndexFlatIP(768)) # dimensionality of vector space
# Add document vectors into index after transforming into numpy arrays. IDs should match len(documents)
index.add_with_ids(np.array([vec.numpy() for vec in vectors]), np.array(range(0, len(self.documents))))
return index
Then perform any similarity metric like L2 Euclidean distance or cosine similarity with dot products. Essentially, concept is that once we transform vectors in an n-dimensional space, vectors with similar semantics are grouped together. Therefore, computing similarity is just computing the angle between them and applying a cosine on it. Similar vectors have less angle, therefore higher cosine value & vice-versa.
Check the following topics for your problem.
Cosine Similarity
FAISS
Sentence Vectors (similar to word vectors, but are good for long documents)
Check this repository for a better understanding of sentence vectorization and computing similarity to retrieve top n sentences.
In short,
Create an index file using FAISS for your data of interest.
Compute similarity by calling one of its methods.
Get top n most similar results.
Removing stop words:
Essentially your problem can be attributed to a list of finite stop words. If you can identify ones to some finite value (e.g. some 25) such different key words at max, then the task becomes stop word removal. Please use NLTK / Spacy libraries for easy stop word removal. You can also specify them in a list of strings, write a condition where if a token matches with one of those strings, they’re deleted from downstream processing. Stop words are omitted & is a necessary pre-processing task in NLP. Your task of telegram
data is also similar to Twitter analysis. Check this & this.
I have been using quanteda for the past couple of months and really enjoy using the package. One question I have is how many rows of a dfm can the textstat_simil function handle before the time to create the similarity matrix becomes too long.
I have a search corpus containing 15 million documents. Each document is a short sentence containing anywhere from 5 to 10 words (the documents sometimes include some 3-4 digit numbers too). I have tokenized this search corpus using character bigrams and created a dfm from it.
I also have another corpus that I call the match corpus. It has a couple hundred documents of similar length, has had the same tokenization, and a dfm created for it also. The aim is to find the closest matching document from the search corpus for each of the match corpus documents.
A combined dfm is made by rbinding the match dfm with the search dfm. The number of unique tokens for the combined dfm is about 1580. I then run textstat_simil on this combined dfm using "cosine" method, "documents" as the margin, and the selection being just one of the match corpus documents for now to test. However, when I run textstat_simil it takes over 5 minutes to run.
Is this sort of volume too much for this type of approach using quanteda?
Cheers,
Sof
In quanteda v1.3.13, we reprogrammed the function for computing cosine similarities so that is more efficient for memory and for storage. However it sounds like you are still trying to get a document-by-document distance matrix (excluding the diagonal) that will be (15000000^2)/2 - 150000000 = 1.124998e+14 cells in size. If you are able to get this to run at all, I'm very impressed with your machine!
For your 1,850 target document set, however, you can narrow this down by using the selection argument.
Also, look for the experimental textstat_proxy() function in v1.3.13, which we created for this sort of problem. You can specify a minimum distance below which a distance will not be recorded, and it returns a distance matrix using a sparse matrix object. This is still experimental because the sparse values are not zeroes, but will be treated as zeroes by any operations on the sparse matrix. (This violates some distance properties - see the discussion here.)
I have a list of products names and a collection of text generated from random users. I am trying to detect products mentioned in the text while talking into account spelling variation. For example the text
Text = i am interested in galxy s8
Mentions the product samsung galaxy s8
But note the difference in spellings.
I've implemented the following approaches:
1- max tokenized products names and users text (i split words by punctuation and digits so s8 will be tokenized into 's' and '8'. Then i did a check on each token in user's text to see if it is in my vocabulary with damerau levenshtein distance <= 1 to allow for variation in spelling. Once i have detected a sequence of tokens that do exist in the vocabulary i do a search for the product that matches the query while checking the damerau levenshtein distance on each token. This gave poor results. Mainly because the sequence of tokens that exist in the vocabulary do not necessarily represent a product. For example since text is max tokenized numbers can be found in the vocabulary and as such dates are detected as products.
2- i constructed bigram and trigram indicies from the list of products and converted each user text into a query.. but also results weren't so great given the spelling variation
3- i manually labeled 270 sentences and trained a named entity recognizer with labels ('O' and 'Product'). I split the data into 80% training and 20% test. Note that I didn't use the list of products as part of the features. Results were okay.. not great tho
None of the above results achieved a reliable performance. I tried regular expressions but since there are so many different combinations to consider it became too complicated.. Are there better ways to tackle this problem? I suppose ner could give better results if i train more data but suppose there isn't enough training data, what do u think a better solution would be?
If i come up with a better alternative to the ones I've already mentioned, I'll add it to this post. In the meantime I'm open to suggestions
Consider splitting your problem into two parts.
1) Conduct a spelling check using a dictionary of known product names (this is not a NLP task and there should be guides on how to impelement spell check).
2) Once you have done pre-processing (spell checking), use your NER algorithm
It should improve your accuracy.
Let's say I have a user search query which looks like:
"the happy bunny"
I have already computed tf-idf and have something like this (following are made up example values) for each document in which I am searching (of coures the idf is always the same):
tf idf score
the 0.06 1 0.06 * 1 = 0.06
happy 0.002 20 0.002 * 20 = 0.04
bunny 0.0005 60 0.0005 * 60 = 0.03
I have two questions with what to do next.
Firstly, the still has the highest score, even though it is adjusted for rarity by idf, still it's not exactly important - do you think I should square the idf values to weight in terms of rare words, or would this give bad results? Otherwise I'm worried that the is getting equal importance to happy and bunny, and it should be obvious that bunny is the most important word in the search. As long as rare always equals important then it would be always a good idea to weight in terms of rarity, but if that is not always the case then doing so could really mess up the results.
Secondly and more importantly: what is the best/preferred method for combining the scores for each word together to give each document a single score that represents how well it reflects the entire search query? I was thinking of adding them, but it has become apparent that that is going to give higher priority to a document containing 10,000 happy but only 1 bunny instead of another document with 500 happy and 500 bunny (which would be a better match).
First, make sure that you are computing the correct TF-IDF values. As others have pointed they do not look right. TF is relative to specific documents, and we often do not need to compute them for queries (since raw term frequency is almost always 1 in queries). There are different types of TF functions to pick from (check the Wikipedia page on tf-idf, it has a good coverage). Log Normalisation is common and the most efficient scheme, since it saves an extra disk access to get the respective document's total frequency maxF that is needed for something like Double Normalisation. When you are dealing with large volumes of documents this can be expensive, especially if you can't bring these into memory. A bit of insight on inverted files can go a long way in understanding some of the underlying complexities. Log normalisation is efficient and is a non-linear function, therefore better than raw frequency.
Once you are certain on your weighting scheme, then you may want to consider a stop list to get rid of very common/noisy words. These do not contribute to the rank of documents. It is generally recommended to use a stop list of high frequency, very common words. Do a search and you will find many available, including the one that Lucene uses.
The remaining lies on your ranking strategy and that will depend on your implementation/model. The vector space model (VSM) is simple and readily available with libraries like Lucene, Lemur, etc. VSM computes the Dot product or scalar of the weights of common terms between the query and a document. Term weights are normalised via vector length normalisation (which solves your second question), and the result of applying the model is a value between 0 and 1. This is also justified/interpreted as the Cosine of the angle between two vectors in a planar graph, or the Euclidean distance divided by the Euclidean vector length of two vectors.
One of the earliest comprehensive studies on weighting schemes and ranking with VSM is an article by Salton (pdf) and is a good read if you are interested in Information Retrieval. A bit outdated perhaps (notice how log normalisation is not mentioned in the article).
Your best read I believe is the book Introduction to Information Retrieval by Christopher Manning. It will take you through everything that you need to know, from indexing to ranking schemes, etc. A bit lacking on ranking models (does not cover some of the more complex probabilistic approaches).
You should reconsider your TF and IDF values, they do not look correct. The TF value is usually just how often the word occurs, so if the word "the" appeared 20 times it's tf value would be 20. A word like "the" should have a very low IDF value (possibly around 4 decimal places, 0.000...).
You could use stop word removal if word like the are not necessary, they would be removed rather than just given a low score.
A vector space model could be used for this.
can you compute tf-idf for amalgamated terms? That is, you first generate a sentiment that considers each of its component as equal before treating the sentiment as a single term for which you now compute the tf-idf