I have no clue of where to start on this. I've never done any NLP and only programmed in Python 3.1, which I have to use. I'm looking at the site http://www.linkedin.com and I have to gather all of the public profiles and some of them have very fake names, like 'aaaaaa k dudujjek' and I've been told I can use NLP to find the real names, where would I even start?
This is a difficult problem to solve, and one which starts with acquiring valid given name & surname lists.
How large is the set of names that you're evaluating, and where do they come from? These are both important things for you to consider. If you're evaluating a small set of "American" names, your valid name lists will differ greatly from lists of Japanese or Indian names, for instance.
Your idea of scraping LinkedIn is on the right track, but you were right to catch the fake profile/name flaw. A better website would probably be something like IMDB (perhaps scraping names by iterating over different birth years), or Wikipedia's lists of most popular given names and most common surnames.
When it comes down to it, this is a precision vs. recall problem: in order to miss fewer fakes, you're inevitably going to throw out some real names. If you loosen up your restrictions, you'll get more fakes, but you'll also throw out fewer real names.
Several possibilities here, but the most obvious seems to be with HMMs, i.e. Hidden Markov Models. The NLTK kit includes [at least] one module for HMMs, although I must admit I never used it.
Another possible snag is that AFAIK, NTLK is not yet ported to Python 3.0
This said, and while I'm quite keen on using NLP techniques where applicable, I think that a process which would use several paradigms, including some NLP tricks may be a better solution for this particular problem. For example, storing even a reduced dictionary of common family names (and first names) in a traditional database may offer both a more reliable and more computationally efficient way of filtering a significant portion of the input data, leaving precious CPU resources to be spent on less obvious cases.
i am afraid this problem is not solveable if your list is even only minimally ‘open’ — if the names are eg customers from a small traditionally acting population, you might end up with a few hundred names for thousands of people. but generally you can hardly predict what is a real name and what is not, however unusual an arabic, chinese, or bantu name may look in a sample of, say, south english rural neighborhood names. i mean, ‘Ng’ is a common cantonese surname, and ‘O’ is common in korea, so assumptions may fail. there is this place in austria called ‘fucking’, so even looking out for four letter words is no guarantee for success.
what you could do is work through a sufficiently big sample of such names and sort them out manually. then, use all kinds of textprocessing tools and collect metrics. maybe you can derive a certain likelyhood for a name to be recognized as fake, maybe it will not be viable. you will never go beyond likelyhoods here, though.
as an aside, we used to use google maps and the telephone directory for validating customer data years ago. if google maps could find the place, we called the address validated. it is clear that under stricter requirements, true validation must go much further. let’s not forget the validation of such data is much more a social question than a linguistic one.
Related
Help by editing my question title and tags is greatly appreciated!
Sometimes one participant in my corpus of "conversations" will refer to another participant using a nickname, usually an abbreviation or misspelling, but hereafter I'll just say "nicknames". Let's say I'm willing to manually tell my software whether or not I think various possible nicknames are in fact nicknames, but I want software to come up with a list of possible matches between the handle's that identify people, and the potential nicknames. How would I go about doing that?
Background on me and then my corpus: I have no experience doing natural language processing but I'm a competent data analyst with R. My data is produced by 70 teams, each forecasting the likelihood of 100 distinct events occurring some time in the future. The result that I have 70 x 100 = 7000 text files, containing the stream of forecasts participants make and the comments they include with their forecasts. I'll paste a very short snip of one of these text files below, this one had to do with whether the Malian government would enter talks with the MNLA:
02/12/2013 20:10: past_returns answered Yes: (50%)
I hadn't done a lot of research when I put in my previous
placeholder... I'm bumping up a lot due to DougL's forecast
02/12/2013 19:31: DougL answered Yes: (60%)
Weak President Traore wants talks if MNLA drops territorial claims.
Mali's military may not want talks. France wants talks. MNLA sugggests
it just needs autonomy. But in 7 weeks?
02/12/2013 10:59: past_returns answered No: (75%)
placeholder forecast...
http://www.irinnews.org/Report/97456/What-s-the-way-forward-for-Mali
My initial thoughts: Obviously I can start by providing the names I'm looking to match things up with... in the above example they would be past_returns and DougL (though there is no use of nicknames in the above). I wouldn't think it'd be that hard to get a computer to guess at minor misspellings (though I wouldn't personally know where to start). I can imagine that other tricks could be used, like assuming that a string is more likely to be a nickname if it is used much much more by one team, than by other teams. A nickname is more likely to refer to someone who spoke recently than someone who spoke long ago, or not at all on regarding this question. And they should be used in sentences in a manner similar to the way the full name/screenname is typically used in the corpus. But I'm interested to hear about simple approaches, as well as ones that try to consider more sophisticated techniques.
This could get about as complicated as you want to make it. From the semi-linguistic side of things, research topics would include Levenshtein Distance (for detecting minor misspellings of known names/nicknames) and Named Entity Recognition (for the task of detecting names/nicknames in the first place). Actually, NER's worth reading about, but existing systems might not help you much in your domain of forum handles and nicknames.
The first rough idea that comes to mind is that you could run a tokenized version of your corpus against an English dictionary (perhaps a dataset compiled from Wiktionary or something like WordNet) to find words that are candidates for names, then filter those through some heuristics (do they start with the same letters as known full names? Do they have a low Levenshtein distance from known names? Are they used more than once?).
You could also try some clustering or supervised ML algorithms against the non-word tokens. That might reveal some non-"word" tokens that often occur in the same threads as a given username; again, heuristics could help rule out some false positives.
Good luck; sounds like a fun problem - hope I mentioned at least one thing you hadn't already thought of.
We are working on clean-up and analysis of a lot of human-entered customer data. We need to decide programmatically whether 2 addresses (for example) are the same, even though the data was entered with slight variations.
Right now we run each address through fairly simplistic string replacement (replacing avenue with ave, for example), concatenate the fields and compare the results. We are doing something similar with names.
At the very least, it seems like our list of search-replace values should already exist somewhere.
Or perhaps you can suggest a totally different and superior way to detect matches?
For the addresses, you should run them through google's map api and get a geocode for each one. Then if the geocodes are the same, the place is the same. I believe they allow 10k hits/day/ip for free.
It's unlikely that you'd come up with anything better on your own.
http://code.google.com/apis/maps/
Soundex and its variants might be a good start as are other approaches suggested by that Wikipedia page.
Essentially you're trying to find how similar two strings are and there are a lot of different ways to measure it. Dice Coefficients could work fairly well for what you're doing, although it is a bit costly of an operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice_coefficient
If you want a more comprehensive list of string similarity measures try here:
http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~sam/stringmetrics.html
At work I help write software that verifies addresses (for SmartyStreets).
Address validation is a really tricky operation -- in fact the USPS has designated certain companies which are certified to provide this service. I would not recommend (even if I was in your shoes) that you attempt this on your own. As mentioned, Google does some address parsing, but only approximates the address. Google and Yahoo and similar services will not verify the accuracy of the address data.
So you'll need a CASS-Certified approach to this problem. I would suggest something like the LiveAddress API (for point-of-entry validation) or Certified Scrubbing (for existing lists or databases of addresses). Both are CASS-Certified by the USPS and will do what you require.
I am currently working on project where I have to match up a large quantity of user-generated names with a separate list of the same names in a canonical format. The problem is that the user-generated names contains numerous misspellings, abbreviations, as well as simply invalid data, making it hard to do a cross-reference with the canonical data. Any suggestions on methods to do this?
This does not have to be done in real-time and in this case accuracy is more important than speed.
Current ideas for this are:
Do a fuzzy search for the user entered name in the canonical database using an existing search implementation like Lucene or Sphinx, which I presume use something like the Levenshtein distance for this.
Cross-reference on the SOUNDEX hash (which is supposedly computed on the sound of the name rather than spelling) instead of using the actual name.
Some combination of the above
Anyone have any feedback on any of these or ideas of their own?
One of my concerns is that none of the above methods will handle abbreviations very well. Can anyone point me in a direction for some machine learning methods to actually search on expanded abbreviations (or tell me I'm crazy)? Thanks in advance.
First, I'd add to your list the techniques discussed at Peter Norvig's post on spelling correction.
Second, I'd ask what kind of "user-generated names" you're talking about. Having dealt with both, I believe that the heuristics you'd use for street names are somewhat different from the heuristics for person names. (As a simple example, does "Dr" expand to "Drive" or "Doctor"?)
Third, I'd look at a combination using testing to establish the set of coefficients for combining the results of the various techniques.
I want to analyze answers to a web survey (Git User's Survey 2008 if one is interested). Some of the questions were free-form questions, like "How did you hear about Git?". With more than 3,000 replies analyzing those replies entirely by hand is out of the question (especially that there is quite a bit of free-form questions in this survey).
How can I group those replies (probably based on the key words used in response) into categories at least semi-automatically (i.e. program can ask for confirmation), and later how to tabularize (count number of entries in each category) those free-form replies (answers)? One answer can belong to more than one category, although for simplicity one can assume that categories are orthogonal / exclusive.
What I'd like to know is at least keyword to search for, or an algorithm (a method) to use. I would prefer solutions in Perl (or C).
Possible solution No 1. (partial): Bayesian categorization
(added 2009-05-21)
One solution I thought about would be to use something like algorithm (and mathematical method behind it) for Bayesian spam filtering, only instead of one or two categories ("spam" and "ham") there would be more; and categories itself would be created adaptively / interactively.
Text::Ngrams + Algorithm::Cluster
Generate some vector representation for each answer (e.g. word count) using Text::Ngrams.
Cluster the vectors using Algorithm::Cluster to determine the groupings and also the keywords which correspond to the groups.
You are not going to like this. But: If you do a survey and you include lots of free-form questions, you better be prepared to categorize them manually. If that is out of the question, why did you have those questions in the first place?
I've brute forced stuff like this in the past with quite large corpuses. Lingua::EN::Tagger, Lingua::Stem::En. Also the Net::Calais API is (unfortunately, as Thomposon Reuters are not exactly open source friendly) pretty useful for extracting named entities from text. Of course once you've cleaned up the raw data with this stuff, the actual data munging is up to you. I'd be inclined to suspect that frequency counts and a bit of mechanical turk cross-validation of the output would be sufficient for your needs.
Look for common words as keywords, but through away meaningless ones like "the", "a", etc. After that you get into natural language stuff that is beyond me.
It just dawned on me that the perfect solution for this is AAI (Artificial Artificial Intelligence). Use Amazon's Mechanical Turk. The Perl bindings are Net::Amazon::MechanicalTurk. At one penny per reply with a decent overlap (say three humans per reply) that would come to about $90 USD.
I'm writing a bridge between the user and a search engine, not a search engine. Part of my value added will be inferring the intent of a query. The intent of a tracking number, stock symbol, or address is fairly obvious. If I can categorise a query, then I can decide if the user even needs to see search results. Of course, if I cannot, then they will see search results. I am currently designing this inference engine.
I'm writing a parser; it should take any given token and assign it a category. Here are some theoretical English examples:
"denver" is a USCITY and a PLACENAME
"aapl" is a NASDAQSYMBOL and a STOCKTICKERSYMBOL
"555 555 5555" is a USPHONENUMBER
I know that each of these cases will most likely require specific handling, however I'm not sure where to start.
Ideally I'd end up with something simple like:
queryCategory = magicCategoryFinder( query )
>print queryCategory
>"SOMECATEGORY or a list"
Natural language parsing is a complicated topic. One of the problems here is that determining what a word is depends on context and implied knowledge. Also, you're not so much interested in words as you are in groups of words. Consider, "New York City" is a place but its three words, two of which (new and city) have other meanings.
also you have to consider ambiguity, which is once again where context and implied knowledge comes in. For example, JAVA is (or was) a stock symbol for Sun Microsystems. It's also a programming language, a place and has meaning associated with coffee. How do you classify it? You'd need to know the context in which it was used.
And if you can solve that problem reliably you can make yourself very wealthy.
What's all this in aid of anyway?
To learn about "tagging" (the term of art for what you're trying to do), I suggest playing around with NLTK's tag module. More generally, NLTK, the Natural Language ToolKit, is an excellent toolkit (based on the Python programming language) for experimentation and learning in the field of Natural Language Processing (whether it's suitable for a given production application may be a different issue, esp. if said application requires very high speed processing on large volumes of data -- but, you have to walk before you can run!-).
You're bumping up against one of the hardest problems in computer science today... determining semantics from english context. This is the classic text mining problem and get into some very advanced topics. I thiink I would suggest thinking more about you're problem and see if you can a) go without categorization or b) perhaps utilize structural info such as document position or something to give you a hint (is either a city or placename or an undetermined) and maybe some lookup tables to help. ie stock symbols are pretty easy to create a pretty full lookup for. You might consider downloading CIA world factbook for a lookup of cities... etc.
As others have already pointed out, this is an exceptionally difficult task. The classic test is a pair of sentences:Time flies like an arrow.Fruit flies like a bananna.
In the first sentence, "flies" is a verb. In the second, it's part of a noun. In the first, "like" is an adverb, but in the second it's a verb. The context doesn't make this particularly easy to sort out either -- there's no obvious difference between "Time" and "Fruit" (both normally nouns). Likewise, "arrow" and "bananna" are both normally nouns.
It can be done -- but it really is decidedly non-trivial.
Although it might not help you much with disambiguation, you could use Cyc. It's a huge database of what things are that's intended to be used in AI applications (though I haven't heard any success stories).