skip to main content
10.1145/2070481.2070509acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesicmi-mlmiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Towards multimodal sentiment analysis: harvesting opinions from the web

Authors Info & Claims
Published:14 November 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

With more than 10,000 new videos posted online every day on social websites such as YouTube and Facebook, the internet is becoming an almost infinite source of information. One crucial challenge for the coming decade is to be able to harvest relevant information from this constant flow of multimodal data. This paper addresses the task of multimodal sentiment analysis, and conducts proof-of-concept experiments that demonstrate that a joint model that integrates visual, audio, and textual features can be effectively used to identify sentiment in Web videos. This paper makes three important contributions. First, it addresses for the first time the task of tri-modal sentiment analysis, and shows that it is a feasible task that can benefit from the joint exploitation of visual, audio and textual modalities. Second, it identifies a subset of audio-visual features relevant to sentiment analysis and present guidelines on how to integrate these features. Finally, it introduces a new dataset consisting of real online data, which will be useful for future research in this area.

References

  1. C. Alm, D. Roth, and R. Sproat. Emotions from text: Machine learning for text-based emotion prediction. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 347--354, Vancouver, Canada, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. J. Arguello and C. Rose. Topic segmentation of dialogue. In HLT-NAACL Workshop on Analyzing Conversations in Text and Speech, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. K. Balog, G. Mishne, and M. de Rijke. Why are they excited? identifying and explaining spikes in blog mood levels. In Proceedings of the 11th Meeting of the European Chapter of the As sociation for Computational Linguistics (EACL-2006), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. T. Banziger and K. R. Scherer. Introducing the geneva multimodal emotion portrayal (gemep) corpus. Oxford University Press, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. J. Blitzer, M. Dredze, and F. Pereira. Biographies, bollywood, boom-boxes and blenders: Domain adaptation for sentiment classification. In Association for Computational Linguistics, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. C. Busso, M. Bulut, C. Lee, A. Kazemzadeh, E. Mower, S. Kim, J. Chang, S. Lee, and S. Narayanan. Iemocap: Interactive emotional dyadic motion capture database. Journal of Language Resources and Evaluation, 42(4):335--359, December 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. C. Busso and S. Narayanan. Interrelation between speech and facial gestures in emotional utterances: a single subject study. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing, 15(8):2331--2347, November 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. G. Carenini, R. Ng, and X. Zhou. Summarizing emails with conversational cohesion and subjectivity. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (ACL-HLT 2008), Columbus, Ohio, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. P. Ekman. Facial expression of emotion. American Psychologist, 48:384--392, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. A. Esuli and F. Sebastiani. SentiWordNet: A publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006), Genova, IT, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. G.McKeown, M. Valstar, R. Cowie, and M. Pantic. The semaine corpus of emotionally coloured character interactions. In ICME, pages 1079--1084, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. N. Godbole, M. Srinivasaiah, and S. Sekine. Large-scale sentiment analysis for news and blogs. In International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Denver, CO, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J. A. Harrigan, T. E. Oxman, and R. Rosenthal. Rapport expressed through nonverbal behavior. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 9(2), 1985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M. Hu and B. Liu. Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, Seattle, Washington, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. N. Kaji and M. Kitsuregawa. Building lexicon for sentiment analysis from massive collection of html documents. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Prague, Czech Republic, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. R. Mihalcea, C. Banea, and J. Wiebe. Learning multilingual subjective language via cross-lingual projections. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Prague, Czech Republic, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. L.-P. Morency, A. Quattoni, and T. Darrell. Latent-dynamic discriminative models for continuous gesture recognition. In CVPR, June 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. B. Pang and L. Lee. A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. In Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Barcelona, Spain, July 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. T. Plotz and G. A. Fink. Markov models for offline handwriting recognition: a survey. International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition, 12(4), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. S. Raaijmakers, K. Truong, and T. Wilson. Multimodal subjectivity analysis of multiparty conversation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 466--474, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. L. Rabiner. A tutorial on hidden markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(2), 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. F. E. M. W. B. Schuller. Openear introducing the munich open-source emotion and affect recognition toolkit. In ACII, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. N. Sebe, I. Cohen, T. Gevers, and T. Huang. Emotion recognition based on joint visual and audio cues. In ICPR, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. P. Stone. General Inquirer: Computer Approach to Content Analysis. MIT Press, 1968.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. C. Strapparava and R. Mihalcea. Semeval-2007 task 14: Affective text. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Semantic Evaluations (SemEval 2007), Prague, Czech Republic, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. M. Taboada, J. Brooke, M. Tofiloski, K. Voli, and M. Stede. Lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis. Computational Linguistics, 37(3), 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. Wiebe and R. Mihalcea. Word sense and subjectivity. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sydney, Australia, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. J. Wiebe and E. Riloff. Creating subjective and objective sentence classifiers from unannotated texts. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (CICLing-2005) (invited paper), Mexico City, Mexico, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. J. Wiebe, T. Wilson, and C. Cardie. Annotating expressions of opinions and emotions in language. Language Resources and Evaluation, 39(2--3):165--210, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. M. Wollmer, B. Schuller, F. Eyben, and G. Rigoll. Combining long short-term memory and dynamic bayesian networks for incremental emotion-sensitive artificial listening. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 4(5), October 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. H. Yu and V. Hatzivassiloglou. Towards answering opinion questions: Separating facts from opinions and identifying the polarity of opinion sentences. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-03), pages 129--136, Sapporo, Japan, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Z. Zhihong, M. P. G. Roisman, and T. Huang. A survey of affect recognition methods: Audio, visual, and spontaneous expressions. PAMI, 31(1), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Towards multimodal sentiment analysis: harvesting opinions from the web

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ICMI '11: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on multimodal interfaces
      November 2011
      432 pages
      ISBN:9781450306416
      DOI:10.1145/2070481

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 14 November 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • poster

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate453of1,080submissions,42%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader