Paper detail

Historical Credibility for Movie Reviews and Its Application to Weakly Supervised Classification

In this study, we deal with the problem of judging the credibility of movie reviews. The problem is challenging because even experts cannot clearly and efficiently judge the credibility of a movie review and the number of movie reviews is very large. To tackle this problem, we propose historical credibility that judges the credibility of reviews based on the historical ratings and textual reviews written by each reviewer. For this, we present three kinds of criteria that can clearly classify the reviews into trusted or distrusted ones. We validate the effectiveness of the proposed historical credibility through extensive analysis. Specifically, we show that characteristics between the trusted or distrusted reviews are quite distinguishable in terms of three viewpoints: 1) distribution, 2) statistics, and 3) correlation. Then, we apply historical credibility to a weakly supervised model to classify a given review as a trusted or distrusted one. First, we show that it is significantly efficient because the entire data set is annotated according to the predefined criteria. Indeed, it can annotate 6,400 movie reviews only in 0.093 seconds, which occupy only 0.55%~1.88% of the total learning time when we use LSTM and SVM as the learning model. Second, we show that the historical credibility-based classification model clearly outperforms the textual review-based classification model. Specifically, the classification accuracy of the former outperforms that of the latter by up to 11.7%~13.4%. In addition, we clearly confirm that our classification model shows higher accuracy as the data size increases.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.