Dependency Tree-Based Rules for Concept-Level Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 475)


Over the last few years, the way people express their opinions has changed dramatically with the progress of social networks, web communities, blogs, wikis, and other online collaborative media. Now, people buy a product and express their opinion in social media so that other people can acquire knowledge about that product before they proceed to buy it. On the other hand, for the companies it has become necessary to keep track of the public opinions on their products to achieve customer satisfaction. Therefore, nowadays opinion mining is a routine task for every company for developing a widely acceptable product or providing satisfactory service. Concept-based opinion mining is a new area of research. The key parts of this research involve extraction of concepts from the text, determining product aspects, and identifying sentiment associated with these aspects. In this paper, we address each one of these tasks using a novel approach that takes text as input and use dependency parse tree-based rules to extract concepts and aspects and identify the associated sentiment. On the benchmark datasets, our method outperforms all existing state-of-the-art systems.


Sentiment Analysis Concept Extraction Online Collaborative Media Implicit Aspects Prepositional Relations 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Poria, S., Gelbukh, A., Hussain, A., Howard, N., Das, D., Bandyopadhyay, S.: Enhanced SenticNet with affective labels for concept-based opinion mining. IEEE Intell. Syst. 28(2), 31–38 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Poria, S., Gelbukh, A., Cambria, E., Hussain, A., Huang, G.B.: EmoSenticSpace: A novel framework for affective common-sense reasoning. Knowl.-Based Syst. (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cambria, E., Rajagopal, D., Olsher, D., Das, D.: Big social data analysis. Big Data Computing. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cambria, E., Hussain, A., Havasi, C., Eckl, C., Munro, J.: Towards crowd validation of the UK national health service. In: WebSci10 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poria, S., Agarwal, B., Gelbukh, A., Hussain, A., Howard, N.: Dependency-based semantic parsing for concept-level text analysis. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2014, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8403, pp. 113–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J.Y., Chuang, J., Manning, C.D., Ng, A.Y., Potts, C.: Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Poria, S., Cambria, E., Ku, L.W., Gui, C., Gelbukh, A.: A rule-based approach to aspect extraction from product reviews. In: Workshop Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, COLING 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruz-Garcia, I.O., Gelbukh, A., Sidorov, G.: Implicit aspect indicator extraction for aspect-based opinion mining (2014) (Submitted)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Qiu, G., Liu, B., Bu, J., Chen, C.: Opinion word expansion and target extraction through double propagation. Comput. Linguist. 37(1), 9–27 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cambria, E., Olsher, D., Rajagopal, D.: Senticnet 3: A common and common-sense knowledge base for cognition-driven sentiment analysis. In: AAAI (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Poria, S., Gelbukh, A., Cambria, E., Yang, P., Hussain, A., Durrani, T.: merging SenticNet and wordnet-affect emotion lists for sentiment analysis. In: 11th International Conference on Signal Processing (ICSP 2012), vol. 2, pp. 1251–1255. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Poria, S., Gelbukh, A., Cambria, E., Das, D., Bandyopadhyay, S.: Enriching SenticNet polarity scores through semi-supervised fuzzy clustering. In: 12th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW 2012), pp. 709–716. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castro-Manzano, J.M.: A defeasible logic of intention. In: Batyrshin, I., González Mendoza, M. (eds.) MICAI 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7629, pp. 321–333. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Poria, S., Cambria, E., Winterstein, G., Huang, G.B.: Sentic patterns: Dependency-based rules for concept-level sentiment analysis. Knowl.-Based Syst. (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2014.05.005
  15. 15.
    Pakray, P., Pal, S., Poria, S., Bandyopadhyay, S., Gelbukh, A.: JU_CSE_TAC: Textual entailment recognition system at TAC RTE-6. In: System Report, Text Analysis Conference Recognizing Textual Entailment Track (TAC RTE), Notebook (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pakray, P., Neogi, S., Bhaskar, P., Poria, S., Bandyopadhyay, S., Gelbukh, A.: A textual entailment system using anaphora resolution. In: System Report. Text Analysis Conference Recognizing Textual Entailment Track (TAC RTE), Notebook (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ofek, N., Rokach, L., Mitra, P.: Methodology for connecting nouns to their modifying adjectives. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2014, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8403, pp. 271–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electrical and Electronic EngineeringNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Department of Information Systems EngineeringBen Gurion UniversityBeershebaIsrael
  3. 3.Centro de Investigación En ComputaciónInstituto Politécnico NacionalMexicoMexico
  4. 4.Department of Computing Science and MathematicsUniversity of StirlingStirlingUK

Personalised recommendations