I'm currently doing the topic modeling things (beginner)
I was thinking using mallet for some tool to get me understand this area, but, my problem is, I'd like to train a model based on, let's say, 1000 documents, to construct a model and using the model on a new single document to generate its potential topics.
But, as far as I read about mallet tutorial, it always says like this tool or API is useful on a corpus of texts, which means, it's used to find topics within several documents.
Is there a way that it can find topic on single document based on the model (or inference parameter it learned / constructed from the 1000 documents?)
Is there any other tool that can do this?
Thanks a lot!
You can refer the example code src/cc/mallet/examples/TopicModel.java which describes how to clustering and infer the new instance.
Actually when you run the simple LDA on a directory the model assigns topic proportions to each of the documents of that directory based on "an already" trained model from a part of your corpus. So, topic proportions are assigned with a certain probability to each of the documents (already ranked by the probability of appearance of that topic to that specific document).
Related
So I am doing a project on document similarity and right now my features are only the embeddings from Doc2Vec. Since that is not showing any good results, after hyperparameter optimization and word embedding before the doc embedding... What other features can I add, so as to get better results?
My dataset is 150 documents, 500-700 words each, with 10 topics(labels), each document having one topic. Documents are labeled on a document level, and that labeling is currently used only for evaluation purposes.
Edit: The following is answer to gojomo's questions and elaborating on my comment on his answer:
The evaluation of the model is done on the training set. I am comparing if the label is the same as the most similar document from the model. For this I am first getting the document vector using the model's method 'infer_vector' and then 'most_similar' to get the most similar document. The current results I am getting are 40-50% of accuracy. A satisfactory score would be of at least 65% and upwards.
Due to the purpose of this research and it's further use case, I am unable to get a larger dataset, that is why I was recommended by a professor, as this is a university project, to add some additional features to the document embeddings of Doc2Vec. As I had no idea what he ment, I am asking the community of stackoverflow.
The end goal of the model is to do clusterization of the documents, again the labels for now being used only for evaluation purposes.
If I don't get good results with this model, I will try out the simpler ones mentioned by #Adnan S #gojomo such as TF-IDF, Word Mover's Distance, Bag of words, just presumed I would get better results using Doc2Vec.
You should try creating TD-IDF with 2 and 3 grams to generate a vector representation for each document. You will have to train the vocabulary on all the 150 documents. Once you have the TF-IDF vector for each document, you can use cosine similarity between any two of them.
Here is a blog article with more details and doc page for sklearn.
How are you evaluating the results as not good, and how will you know when your results are adequate/good?
Note that just 150 docs of 400-700 words each is a tiny, tiny dataset: typical datasets used published Doc2Vec results include tens-of-thousands to millions of documents, of hundreds to thousands of words each.
It will be hard for any of the Word2Vec/Doc2Vec/etc-style algorithms to do much with so little data. (The gensim Doc2Vec implementation includes a similar toy dataset, of 300 docs of 200-300 words each, as part of its unit-testing framework, and to eke out even vaguely useful results, it must up the number of training epochs, and shrink the vector size, significantly.)
So if intending to use Doc2Vec-like algorithms, your top priority should be finding more training data. Even if, in the end, only ~150 docs are significant, collecting more documents that use similar domain language can help improve the model.
It's unclear what you mean when you say there are 10 topics, and 1 topic per document. Are those human-assigned categories, and are those included as part of the training texts or tags passed to the Doc2Vec algorithm? (It might be reasonable to include it, depending on what your end-goals and document-similarity evaluations consist of.)
Are these topics the same as the labelling you also mention, and are you ultimately trying to predict the topics, or just using the topics as a check of the similarity-results?
As #adnan-s suggests in the other answer, it may also be worth trying more-simple count-based 'bag of words' document representations, including potentially on word n-grams or even character n-grams, or TF-IDF weighted.
If you have adequate word-vectors, as trained from your data or from other compatible sources, the "Word Mover's Distance" measure can be another interesting way to compute pairwise similarities. (However, it may be too expensive to calculate between many-hundred-word texts - working much faster on shorter texts.)
As others have already suggested your training set of 150 documents probably isn't big enough to create good representations. You could, however, try to use a pre-trained model and infer the vectors of your documents.
Here is a link where you can download a (1.4GB) DBOW model trained on English Wikipedia pages, working with 300-dimensional document vectors. I obtained the link from jhlau/doc2vec GitHub repository. After downloading the model you can use it as follows:
from gensim.models import Doc2Vec
# load the downloaded model
model_path = "enwiki_dbow/doc2vec.bin"
model = Doc2Vec.load(model_path)
# infer vector for your document
doc_vector = model.infer_vector(doc_words)
Where doc_words is a list of words in your document.
This, however, may not work for you in case your documents are very specific. But you can still give it a try.
I am beginner to Machine Learning and NLP, I have to create a bot based on FAQ dataset, Each FAQ dataset excel file contains 2 columns "Questions" and its "Answers".
Eg. A record from an excel file (A question & it's answer).
Question - What is RASA-NLU?
Answer - Rasa NLU is trained to identify intent and entities. Better the training, better the identification...
We have 3K+ excel files which has around 10K to 20K such records each excel.
To implement the bot, I would have followed exactly this FAQ bot approach which uses RASA-NLU, but the RASA,Chatterbot also Microsoft's QnA maker are not allowed in my organization.
And Spacy does the NER extraction perfectly for me, so I am looking for a bot creation using Spacy. but I don't know how to proceed further after extracting the entities. (IMHO, I will have to predict the exact question from dataset (and its answer from knowlwdge base) from user query to the bot)
I don't know what NLP algorithm/ ML process to be used or is there any easiest way to create that FAQ bot using extracted NERs.
One way to achieve your FAQ bot is to transform the problem into a classification problem. You have questions and the answers can be the "labels". I suppose that you always have multiple training questions which map to the same answer. You can encode each answer in order to get smaller labels (for instance, you can map the text of the answer to an id).
Then, you can use your training data (the questions) and your labels (the encoded answers) and feed a classifier. After the training your classifier can predict the label of unseen questions.
Of course, this is a supervised approach, so you will need to extract features from your training sentences (the questions). In this case, you can use as a feature the bag-of-word representations and even include the named entities.
An example of how to do text classification in spacy is available here: https://www.dataquest.io/blog/tutorial-text-classification-in-python-using-spacy/
I'm looking to use Mallet to classify different documents by topics that I have defined. I know that Mallet will first determine the topics, then classify the documents but I want to skip the first step because I already have a list of topics with words associated with them. Is there any way to use pre-defined topic lists that I have created to classify documents with Mallet?
Any guidance is appreciated. Thanks!
If you're doing unsupervised learning (without training examples, i.e. docs for each topic), you cannot trivially just set the topics. The point is that the training algorithm does not know anything about the docs in advance. It just tries to separate/distribute them, based on the features you provide.
If you're doing supervised learning, topics are actually classes and you have documents for each class. Then the algorithm tries to learn which features are significant for each class. In mallet you should use the Classification module.
There are probably some fancy topic modelling ideas, which incorporate / skew the topic distributions according to specific keywords, but I don't think that's possible with Mallet.
I am working on a text classification project where I am trying to assign topic classifications to speeches from the Congressional Record.
Using topic codes from the Congressional Bills Project (http://congressionalbills.org/), I've tagged speeches that mention a specific bill as belonging to the topic of the bill. I'm using this as my "training set" for the model.
I have a "vanilla" Naive Bayes classifier working well-enough, but I keep feeling like I could get better accuracy out of the algorithm by incorporating information about the member of Congress who is making the speech (e.g. certain members are much more likely to talk about Foreign Policy than others).
One possibility would be to replace the prior in the NB classifier (usually defined as the proportion of documents in the training set that have the given classification) with speaker's observed prior speeches.
Is this worth pursuing? Are there existing approaches that have followed this same kind of logic? I'm a little bit familiar with the "author-topic models" that come out of Latent Dirichlet Allocation models, but I like the simplicity of the NB model.
There is no need to modify anything, simply add this information to your Naive Bayes and it will work just fine.
And as it was previously mentioned in the comment - do not change any priors - prior probability is P(class), this has nothing to do with actual features.
Just add to your computations another feature corresponding to the authorship, e.g. "author:AUTHOR" and train Naive Bayes as usual, ie. compute P(class|author:AUTHOR) for each class and AUTHOR and use it later on in your classification process.If your current representation is a bag of words, it is sufficient to add a "artificial" word of form "author:AUTHOR" to it.
One other option would be to train independent classifier for each AUTHOR, which would capture person-specific type of speech, for example - one uses lots of words "environment" only when talking about "nature", while other simply likes to add this word in each speach "Oh, in our local environment of ...". Independent NBs would capture these kind of phenomena.
Okay, so usually topic models (such as LDA, pLSI, etc.) are used to infer topics that may be present in a set of documents, in an unsupervised fashion. I would like to know if anyone has any ideas as to how I can shoehorn my problem into an LDA framework, as there are very good tools available to solve LDA problems.
For the sake of being thorough, I have the following pieces of information as input:
A set of documents (segments of DNA from one organism, where each segment is a document)
A document can only have one topic in this scenario
A set of topics (segments of DNA from other organisms)
Words in this case are triplets of bases (for now)
The question I want to answer is: For the current document, what is its topic? In other words, for the given DNA segment, which other organism (same species) did it most likely come from? There could have been mutations and such since the exchange of segments occurred, so the two segments won't be identical.
The main difference between this and the classical LDA model is that I know the topics ahead of time.
My initial idea was to take a pLSA model (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLSA) and just set the topic nodes explicitly, then perform standard EM learning (if only there were a decent library that could handle Bayesian parameter learning with latent variables...), followed by inference using whatever algorithm (which shouldn't matter, because the model is a polytree anyway).
Edit: I think I've solved it, for anyone who might stumble across this. I figured out that you can use labelled LDA and just assign every label to every document. Since each label has a one-to-one correspondence with a topic, you're effectively saying to the algorithm: for each document, choose the topic from this given set of topics (the label set), instead of making up your own.
I have a similar problem, and just thought I'd add the solutions I'm going with for completeness's sake.
I also have a set of documents (pdf documents anywhere from 1 to 200
pages), though mine are regular English text data.
A set of known topics (mine include subtopics, but I won't address that here). Unlike the previous example, I may desire multiple topic labels.
Words (standard English, though named entities and acronyms are included in my corpus)
LDAesk approach: Guided LDA
Guided LDA lets you seed words for your LDA categories. If you have n-topics for your final decisions you just create your guidedLDA algorithm with n-seed topics, each of which contain the keywords that makeup their topic name. Eg: I want to cluster into known topics "biochemistry" and "physics". Then I seed my guidedLDA with d = {0: ['biochemsitry'], 1: ['physics']}. You can incorporate other guiding words if you can identify them, however the guidedLDA algorithm I'm using (python version) makes it relatively easy to identify the top n-words for a given topic. You can run guidedLDA once with only basic seed words then use the top n-words output to consider for more words to add to topics. These top n-words also are potentially helpful for the other approach I'm mentioning.
Non-LDAesk approach: ~KNN
What I've ended up doing is using a word embedding model (word2vec has been superior to alternatives for my case) to create a "topic vector" for every topic based on the words that make up the topic/subtopic. Eg: I have a category Biochemistry with a subcategory Molecular Biology. The most basic topic vector is just the word2vec vectors for Biochemistry, Molecular, and Biology all averaged together.
For every document I want to determine a topic for, I turn it into a "document vector" (same dimension & embedding model as how I made my topic vectors - I've found just averaging all the word2vec vectors in the doc has been the best solution for my so far, after a bit of preprocessing like removing stopwords). Then I just find the k-closest topic vectors to the input document vector.
I should note that there's some ability to hand tune this by changing the words that makeup the topic vectors. One way to potentially identify further keywords is to use the guidedLDA model I mentioned earlier.
I would note that when I was testing these two solutions on a different corpus with labeled data (which I didn't use aside from evaluating accuracy and such) this ~KNN approach proved better than the GuidedLDA approach.
Why not simply use a supervised topic model. Jonathan Chang's lda package in R has an slda function that is quite nice. There is also a very helpful demo. Just install the package and run demo(slda).