FIRE: Finding Important News REports

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10546)


Every day, an immeasurable number of news items are published. Social media greatly contributes to the dissemination of information, making it difficult to stay on top of what is happening. Twitter stands out among popular social networks due to its large user base and the immediateness with which news is spread.

In this paper, we present a solution named Finding Important News REports (FIRE) that exploits the information available on Twitter to identify and track breaking news, and the defining articles that discuss them. The methods used in FIRE present context-specific problems when dealing with the micro-messages of Twitter, and thus they are the subject of research.

FIRE demonstrates how Twitter’s conversation habits do nothing to shackle the detection of important news. To the contrary, the developed system is able to extract newsworthy stories that are important to the general population, and do so before Twitter itself. Moreover, the results emphasize the need for reliable and efficient spam and noise filtering tools.


Twitter Emerging topic detection and tracking Spam filtering 


  1. 1.
    Cataldi, M., Di Caro, L., Schifanella, C.: Emerging topic detection on Twitter based on temporal and social terms evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Workshop on Multimedia Data Mining, MDMKDD 2010, pp. 4:1–4:10. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Madani, A., Boussaid, O., Zegour, D.E.: Real-time trending topics detection and description from Twitter content. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 5(1), 1–13 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vosecky, J., Jiang, D., Leung, K.W.-T., Ng, W.: Dynamic multi-faceted topic discovery in Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management, CIKM 2013, pp. 879–884. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yang, M.-C., Rim, H.-C.: Identifying interesting Twitter contents using topical analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(9), 4330–4336 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sankaranarayanan, J., Samet, H., Teitler, B.E., Lieberman, M.D., Sperling, J.: Twitterstand: news in tweets. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, GIS 2009, pp. 42–51. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cataldi, M., Caro, L.D., Schifanella, C.: Personalized emerging topic detection based on a term aging model. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 5(1), 7:1–7:27 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vadrevu, S., Teo, C.H., Rajan, S., Punera, K., Dom, B., Smola, A.J., Chang, Y., Zheng, Z.: Scalable clustering of news search results. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, WSDM 2011, pp. 675–684. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Legány, C., Juhász, S., Babos, A.: Cluster validity measurement techniques. In: Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering and Data Bases, AIKED 2006, pp. 388–393. World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS), Stevens Point (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Staff, C., Azzopardi, J., Layfield, C., Mercieca, D.: Search results clustering without external resources. In: 2015 26th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA), pp. 276–280, September 2015Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Azzopardi, J., Staff, C.: Incremental clustering of news reports. Algorithms 5(3), 364 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benevenuto, F., Magno, G., Rodrigues, T., Almeida, V.: Detecting spammers on Twitter. In: Collaboration, Electronic Messaging, Anti-Abuse and Spam Conference (CEAS) (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gardner, M.W., Dorling, S.R.: Artificial neural networks (the multilayer perceptron)—a review of applications in the atmospheric sciences. Atmos. Environ. 32(14), 2627–2636 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shen, H., Liu, X.: Detecting spammers on Twitter based on content and social interaction. In: 2015 International Conference on Network and Information Systems for Computers, pp. 413–417, January 2015Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Porter, M.F.: An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 14(3), 130–137 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McMinn, A.J., Moshfeghi, Y., Jose, J.M.: Building a large-scale corpus for evaluating event detection on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management, CIKM 2013, pp. 409–418. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ştefănescu, D., Banjade, R., Rus, V.: Latent semantic analysis models on Wikipedia and TASA. In: Language Resources Evaluation Conference (LREC) (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MaltaMsidaMalta

Personalised recommendations