Interpreting Contents in Social Network using Some Generic Rules with Abstract Propositions

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Data Analysis & Processing Research Group, IT Research Faculty, ICT Research Institute, Iran; mahmodi@itrc.ac.ir

2 Net&Sys Security Assessment Research Group, ICT Security Faculty, ICT Research Institute, Iran;

3 Data Analysis & Processing Research Group, IT Research Faculty, ICT Research Institute, Iran;

4 E-Content & E-Services Research Group, IT Research Faculty, ICT Research Institute, Iran;

Abstract

Content interpretation is a cognitive ability which is mostly concerned with understanding the intention of the person who has created or narrated the content.  Narrator is also important since his/ her specific intention, which is inevitable in media like a social network, may change the reality of a created content. Here, the focal point is a sort of transformation with the aim of yielding the class of a message behind the content. In this paper, we propose a rule-based framework for interpreting contents in a social network that has the ability to perform such a transformation through using some generic rules with propositions at high abstraction level. The reason for selecting abstract propositions is their ability in covering wide range of facts occurring in the real world situation. Our suggested framework is in reality able to determine the class of a message indicating the possible intention of either a content’s creator or its narrator, such as whether a narrator is seeking honesty/justice toward the others, is after respect for the people, cares for compassion/ mercy, emphasizes a significance of knowing/ thinking in life, or is after self-upgradation to conduct a healthy life. These classes of message are determined according to both philosophical and psychological aspects which do exist behind the cognitive, emotional and ethical faculties in human being. Results of some experiments show that the generic rules proposed in this paper, which are structured on the ground of abstract propositions, have enough ability to respond successfully to the issue of interpretation in a social network with the characteristics already mentioned. Also, these results approve the fact that such an abstraction is able enough to handle the possible facts hidden in the contents showing up in social network.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  • References
    • Badie, “Creative Idea Generation Via Interpretative Approach to Analogical Reasoning”, The International Journal of Systems & Cybernetics (kybernetes), vol. 31, no. 9/10, pp.1210-1219, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1108/03684920210443428
    • E. Barnett, “Interpretation and Construction”, Harv. JL & Pub. Pol'y, vol. 34, pp. 65-72, 2011. https://scholarship.law.georgetown. edu/facpub/820
    • M. Lindgren, B. Lundman, and U. H. Graneheim, “Abstraction and interpretation during the qualitative content analysis process”, International journal of nursing studies, 108, 103632, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103632.
    • Baek, W. Jung, and S. H. Han, “A critical review of text-based research in construction: Data source, analysis method and implications", Automation in Construction, vol. 132, no. 8, 103915, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103915.
    • Stubbs, “Texts, corpora, and problems of interpretation: A response to Widdowson”, Applied linguistics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 149-172, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.2.149.
    • Kuckartz, “Qualitative text analysis: A systematic approach”, In: G. Kaiser and N. Presmeg (eds), Compendium for Early Career Researchers in Mathematics Education, ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham., 2019, pp.181-197.
    • A. Mishlanov, E. M. Krizhanovskaya, and Y. M. Kuznetsova, “Interpretation of the implicit modality: Semiotic markers of the speech intentions in the texts of online communication”, Media Linguistics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 366-378, 2021.
    • Bohnsack, “The interpretation of pictures and the documentary method”, Historical Social Research/ Historische Sozialforschung, vol. 34, no. 2 (128), Counterfactual Thinking as a Scientific Method / Kontrafaktisches Denken als wissenschaftliche Methode, pp. 296-321, 2009.
    • R. Hobbs, M. E. Stickel, D. E. Appelt, and P. Martin, “Interpretation as abduction”, Artificial intelligence, vol. 63, no. 1-2, pp. 69-142, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(93)90015-4.
    • Dadhich and B. Thankachan, “Sentiment analysis of amazon product reviews using hybrid rule-based approach”. In Smart Systems: Innovations in Computing: Proceedings of SSIC 2021, Springer Singapore, 2022, pp. 173-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2877-1_17
    • Brüninghaus, S., & Ashley, K. D., “Reasoning with textual cases”. In: Muñoz-Ávila, H., Ricci, F. (eds) Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, ICCBR 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (), vol 3620, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, August, 2005, pp. 137-151, https://doi.org/10.1007/11536406_13.
    • Valls-Vargas, J. Zhu, and S. Ontanón, “Narrative hermeneutic circle: Improving character role identification from natural language text via feedback loops”. In Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, June, 2015, pp. 2517-2523.
    • Guida, H. Tardieu, O. Le Bohec, and S. Nicolas, “Are schemas sufficient to interpret the personalization effect? Only if long-term working memory backs up”, European review of applied psychology, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 99-107, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2012.09.006.
    • S. Fuchs, P. M. Seethaler, S. K. Sterba, C. Craddock, D. Fuchs, D. L. Compton, D. C. Geary, and P. Changas, “Closing the word-problem achievement gap in first grade: Schema-based word-problem intervention with embedded language comprehension instruction”. Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 113, no. 1, pp.86-103, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000467.
    • Szymańska, “A Frame-Based Approach to the Analysis of Forms of Address in Subtitling”, Acta philologica, vol. 40, no. 40, pp.53-68, 2011.
    • A. Goldman, “Frame semantics and text interpretation”. Журнал Сибирского федерального университета. Серия: Гуманитарные науки, vol. 5, no. 4, pp.479-483, 2012.
    • R. Recupero, M. Alam, D. Buscaldi, A. Grezka, and F. Tavazoee, “Frame-based detection of figurative language in tweets [application notes]”, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, vol. 14, no. 4, pp.77-88, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCI.2019.2937614
    • Dalpanagioti, “What frame semantics can offer to task‐based language teaching”, TESOL Journal, vil. 14, no. 2, p. e692, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.692.
    • Allahyari, K. J. Kochut, and M. Janik, “Ontology-based text classification into dynamically defined topics”. In 2014 IEEE international conference on semantic computing, IEEE, June 2014, pp. 273-278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSC.2014.51.
    • Cimiano, U. Christina, J. and McCrae, Ontology-based interpretation of natural language, Springer Nature, 2022.
    • Veritawati, I. Wasito, and T. Basaruddin, “Text interpretation using a modified process of the ontology and sparse clustering”, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, vol. 95, no. 5, pp. 1019-1028, 2017.
    • Xu, and C. Hubo, “Ontology and rule-based natural language processing approach for interpreting textual regulations on underground utility infrastructure”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, vol. 48, p. 101288, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101288.
    • Kol, I. Thaler, N. Paz, and O. Shmueli, “Interpretation of nonstress tests by an artificial neural network”, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 172, no. 5, pp. 1372-1379, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(95)90465-4.
    • Li, X. Huang, and J. Gong, “Deep neural network for remote-sensing image interpretation: Status and perspectives”, National Science Review, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1082-1086, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwz058.
    • R. Hilgard, “The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection, and conation”, The Journal of the History of Behavioral Sciences, vol. 16, pp. 107-117, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696.
    • Kolbe, The Conative Connection: Acting on Instinct, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1990.
    • Waisel, “On KOLBE Capabilities and Research”. Report: Kolbe Corp, 2013.
    • Yolles, “Consciousness, Sapience and Sentience—A Metacybernetic View”, Systems, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 254, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10060254.
International Journal of Web Research
Volume 6, Issue 1
June 2023
Pages 1-8

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics