Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Feature selection and unsupervised learning for multilingual data + machine learning algorithm selection

Questions

I want to classify/categorize/cluster/group together a set of several thousand websites. There's data that we can train on, so we can do supervised learning, but it's not data that we've gathered and we're not adamant about using it -- so we're also considering unsupervised learning.

  • What features can I use in a machine learning algorithm to deal with multilingual data? Note that some of these languages might not have been dealt with in the Natural Language Processing field.

  • If I were to use an unsupervised learning algorithm, should I just partition the data by language and deal with each language differently? Different languages might have different relevant categories (or not, depending on your psycholinguistic theoretical tendencies), which might affect the decision to partition.

  • I was thinking of using decision trees, or maybe Support Vector Machines (SVMs) to allow for more features (from my understanding of them). This post suggests random forests instead of SVMs. Any thoughts?

Pragmatical approaches are welcome! (Theoretical ones, too, but those might be saved for later fun.)

Some context

We are trying to classify a corpus of many thousands of websites in 3 to 5 languages (maybe up to 10, but we're not sure).

We have training data in the form of hundreds of websites already classified. However, we may choose to use that data set or not -- if other categories make more sense, we're open to not using the training data that we have, since it is not something we gathered in the first place. We are on the final stages of scraping data/text from websites.

Now we must decide on the issues above. I have done some work with the Brown Corpus and the Brill tagger, but this will not work because of the multiple-languages issue.

We intend to use the Orange machine learning package.

like image 901
arturomp Avatar asked Mar 23 '11 19:03

arturomp


3 Answers

According to the context you have provided, this is a supervised learning problem. Therefore, you are doing classification, not clustering. If I misunderstood, please update your question to say so.

I would start with the simplest features, namely tokenize the unicode text of the pages, and use a dictionary to translate every new token to a number, and simply consider the existence of a token as a feature.

Next, I would use the simplest algorithm I can - I tend to go with Naive Bayes, but if you have an easy way to run SVM this is also nice.

Compare your results with some baseline - say assigning the most frequent class to all the pages.

Is the simplest approach good enough? If not, start iterating over algorithms and features.

like image 173
Yuval F Avatar answered Oct 22 '22 05:10

Yuval F


If you go the supervised route, then the fact that the web pages are in multiple languages shouldn't make a difference. If you go with, say lexical features (bag-o'-words style) then each language will end up yielding disjoint sets of features, but that's okay. All of the standard algorithms will likely give comparable results, so just pick one and go with it. I agree with Yuval that Naive Bayes is a good place to start, and only if that doesn't meet your needs that try something like SVMs or random forests.

If you go the unsupervised route, though, the fact that the texts aren't all in the same language might be a big problem. Any reasonable clustering algorithm will first group the texts by language, and then within each language cluster by something like topic (if you're using content words as features). Whether that's a bug or a feature will depend entirely on why you want to classify these texts. If the point is to group documents by topic, irrespective of language, then it's no good. But if you're okay with having different categories for each language, then yeah, you've just got as many separate classification problems as you have languages.

If you do want a unified set of classes, then you'll need some way to link similar documents across languages. Are there any documents in more that one language? If so, you could use them as a kind of statistical Rosetta Stone, to link words in different languages. Then, using something like Latent Semantic Analysis, you could extend that to second-order relations: words in different languages that don't ever occur in the same document, but which tend to co-occur with words which do. Or maybe you could use something like anchor text or properties of the URLs to assign a rough classification to documents in a language-independent manner and use that as a way to get started.

But, honestly, it seems strange to go into a classification problem without a clear idea of what the classes are (or at least what would count as a good classification). Coming up with the classes is the hard part, and it's the part that'll determine whether the project is a success or failure. The actual algorithmic part is fairly rote.

like image 3
rmalouf Avatar answered Oct 22 '22 05:10

rmalouf


Main answer is: try different approaches. Without actual testing it's very hard to predict what method will give best results. So, I'll just suggest some methods that I would try first and describe their pros and cons.

First of all, I would recommend supervised learning. Even if the data classification is not very accurate, it may still give better results than unsupervised clustering. One of the reasons for it is a number of random factors that are used during clustering. For example, k-means algorithm relies on randomly selected points when starting the process, which can lead to a very different results for different program runnings (though x-means modifications seems to normalize this behavior). Clustering will give good results only if underlying elements produce well separated areas in the feature space.

One of approaches to treating multilingual data is to use multilingual resources as support points. For example, you can index some Wikipedia's articles and create "bridges" between same topics in different languages. Alternatively, you can create multilingual association dictionary like this paper describes.

As for methods, the first thing that comes to mind is instance-based semantic methods like LSI. It uses vector space model to calculate distance between words and/or documents. In contrast to other methods it can efficiently treat synonymy and polysemy. Disadvantage of this method is a computational inefficiency and leak of implementations. One of the phases of LSI makes use of a very big cooccurrence matrix, which for large corpus of documents will require distributed computing and other special treatment. There's modification of LSA called Random Indexing which do not construct full coocurrence matrix, but you'll hardly find appropriate implementation for it. Some time ago I created library in Clojure for this method, but it is pre-alpha now, so I can't recommend using it. Nevertheless, if you decide to give it a try, you can find project 'Clinch' of a user 'faithlessfriend' on github (I'll not post direct link to avoid unnecessary advertisement).

Beyond special semantic methods the rule "simplicity first" must be used. From this point, Naive Bayes is a right point to start from. The only note here is that multinomial version of Naive Bayes is preferable: my experience tells that count of words really does matter.

SVM is a technique for classifying linearly separable data, and text data is almost always not linearly separable (at least several common words appear in any pair of documents). It doesn't mean, that SVM cannot be used for text classification - you still should try it, but results may be much lower than for other machine learning tasks.

I haven't enough experience with decision trees, but using it for efficient text classification seems strange to me. I have seen some examples where they gave excellent results, but when I tried to use C4.5 algorithm for this task, the results were terrible. I believe you should get some software where decision trees are implemented and test them by yourself. It is always better to know then to suggest.

There's much more to say on every topic, so feel free to ask more questions on specific topic.

like image 1
ffriend Avatar answered Oct 22 '22 03:10

ffriend