Skip Navigation


Literary and Linguistic Computing Advance Access originally published online on September 1, 2008
Literary and Linguistic Computing 2008 23(3):327-343; doi:10.1093/llc/fqn015
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/3/327    most recent
fqn015v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yu, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ALLC and ACH. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

An evaluation of text classification methods for literary study

Bei Yu

Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA

Correspondence: Bei Yu, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA. E-mail: beiyu.work{at}gmail.com

   Abstract

This article presents an empirical evaluation of text classification methods in literary domain. This study compared the performance of two popular algorithms, naïve Bayes and support vector machines (SVMs) in two literary text classification tasks: the eroticism classification of Dickinson's poems and the sentimentalism classification of chapters in early American novels. The algorithms were also combined with three text pre-processing tools, namely stemming, stopword removal, and statistical feature selection, to study the impact of these tools on the classifiers’ performance in the literary setting. Existing studies outside the literary domain indicated that SVMs are generally better than naïve Bayes classifiers. However, in this study SVMs were not all winners. Both algorithms achieved high accuracy in sentimental chapter classification, but the naïve Bayes classifier outperformed the SVM classifier in erotic poem classification. Self-feature selection helped both algorithms improve their performance in both tasks. However, the two algorithms selected relevant features in different frequency ranges, and therefore captured different characteristics of the target classes. The evaluation results in this study also suggest that arbitrary feature-reduction steps such as stemming and stopword removal should be taken very carefully. Some stopwords were highly discriminative features for Dickinson's erotic poem classification. In sentimental chapter classification, stemming undermined subsequent feature selection by aggressively conflating and neutralizing discriminative features.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.