Researcher profile

Ted Pedersen

Ted Pedersen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
1topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Duluth at SemEval-2019 Task 6: Lexical Approaches to Identify and Categorize Offensive Tweets

This paper describes the Duluth systems that participated in SemEval--2019 Task 6, Identifying and Categorizing Offensive Language in Social Media (OffensEval). For the most part these systems took traditional Machine Learning approaches that built classifiers from lexical features found in manually labeled training data. However, our most successful system for classifying a tweet as offensive (or not) was a rule-based black--list approach, and we also experimented with combining the training data from two different but related SemEval tasks. Our best systems in each of the three OffensEval tasks placed in the middle of the comparative evaluation, ranking 57th of 103 in task A, 39th of 75 in task B, and 44th of 65 in task C.

preprint2020arXiv

Duluth at SemEval-2020 Task 12: Offensive Tweet Identification in English with Logistic Regression

This paper describes the Duluth systems that participated in SemEval--2020 Task 12, Multilingual Offensive Language Identification in Social Media (OffensEval--2020). We participated in the three English language tasks. Our systems provide a simple Machine Learning baseline using logistic regression. We trained our models on the distantly supervised training data made available by the task organizers and used no other resources. As might be expected we did not rank highly in the comparative evaluation: 79th of 85 in Task A, 34th of 43 in Task B, and 24th of 39 in Task C. We carried out a qualitative analysis of our results and found that the class labels in the gold standard data are somewhat noisy. We hypothesize that the extremely high accuracy (> 90%) of the top ranked systems may reflect methods that learn the training data very well but may not generalize to the task of identifying offensive language in English. This analysis includes examples of tweets that despite being mildly redacted are still offensive.

preprint2020arXiv

Duluth at SemEval-2020 Task 7: Using Surprise as a Key to Unlock Humorous Headlines

We use pretrained transformer-based language models in SemEval-2020 Task 7: Assessing the Funniness of Edited News Headlines. Inspired by the incongruity theory of humor, we use a contrastive approach to capture the surprise in the edited headlines. In the official evaluation, our system gets 0.531 RMSE in Subtask 1, 11th among 49 submissions. In Subtask 2, our system gets 0.632 accuracy, 9th among 32 submissions.

preprint2010arXiv

Computational Approaches to Measuring the Similarity of Short Contexts : A Review of Applications and Methods

Measuring the similarity of short written contexts is a fundamental problem in Natural Language Processing. This article provides a unifying framework by which short context problems can be categorized both by their intended application and proposed solution. The goal is to show that various problems and methodologies that appear quite different on the surface are in fact very closely related. The axes by which these categorizations are made include the format of the contexts (headed versus headless), the way in which the contexts are to be measured (first-order versus second-order similarity), and the information used to represent the features in the contexts (micro versus macro views). The unifying thread that binds together many short context applications and methods is the fact that similarity decisions must be made between contexts that share few (if any) words in common.