skip to main content
research-article

Knowledge-enhanced Prompt-tuning for Stance Detection

Published:16 June 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Investigating public attitudes on social media is important in opinion mining systems. Stance detection aims to analyze the attitude of an opinionated text (e.g., favor, neutral, or against) toward a given target. Existing methods mainly address this problem from the perspective of fine-tuning. Recently, prompt-tuning has achieved success in natural language processing tasks. However, conducting prompt-tuning methods for stance detection in real-world remains a challenge for several reasons: (1) The text form of stance detection is usually short and informal, which makes it difficult to design label words for the verbalizer. (2) The tweet text may not explicitly give the attitude. Instead, users may use various hashtags or background knowledge to express stance-aware perspectives. In this article, we first propose a prompt-tuning-based framework that performs stance detection in a cloze question manner. Specifically, a knowledge-enhanced prompt-tuning framework (KEprompt) method is designed, which consists of an automatic verbalizer (AutoV) and background knowledge injection (BKI). Specifically, in AutoV, we introduce a semantic graph to build a better mapping from the predicted word of the pretrained language model and detection labels. In BKI, we first propose a topic model for learning hashtag representation and introduce ConceptGraph as the supplement of the target. At last, we present a challenging dataset for stance detection, where all stance categories are expressed in an implicit manner. Extensive experiments on a large real-world dataset demonstrate the superiority of KEprompt over state-of-the-art methods.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Allaway Emily and Mckeown Kathleen. 2020. Zero-shot stance detection: A dataset and model using generalized topic representations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). 89138931.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. [2] Allaway Emily and McKeown Kathleen R.. 2020. Zero-shot stance detection: A dataset and model using generalized topic representations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, 89138931.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. [3] Augenstein I., Rocktaeschel T., Vlachos A., and Bontcheva K.. 2016. Stance detection with bidirectional conditional encoding. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. [4] Cambria Erik, Liu Qian, Decherchi Sergio, Xing Frank, and Kwok Kenneth. 2022. SenticNet 7: A commonsense-based neurosymbolic AI framework for explainable sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Cambria Erik, Poria Soujanya, Hazarika Devamanyu, and Kwok Kenneth. 2018. SenticNet 5: Discovering conceptual primitives for sentiment analysis by means of context embeddings. In Proceeedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Cignarella Alessandra Teresa, Bosco Cristina, and Rosso Paolo. 2022. Do dependency relations help in the task of stance detection? In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP. Association for Computational Linguistics, 1017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Conforti Costanza, Berndt Jakob, Pilehvar Mohammad Taher, Giannitsarou Chryssi, Toxvaerd Flavio, and Collier Nigel. 2020. Will-they-won’t-they: A very large dataset for stance detection on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 17151724.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Conforti Costanza, Berndt Jakob, Pilehvar Mohammad Taher, Giannitsarou Chryssi, Toxvaerd Flavio, and Collier Nigel. 2021. Synthetic examples improve cross-target generalization: A study on stance detection on a Twitter corpus. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity, Sentiment and Social Media Analysis. Association for Computational Linguistics, 181187.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. [9] Dan Yuhao, Zhou Jie, Chen Qin, Bai Qingchun, and He Liang. 2022. Enhancing class understanding via prompt-tuning for zero-shot text classification. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. IEEE, 43034307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. [10] Devlin Jacob, Chang Ming-Wei, Lee Kenton, and Toutanova Kristina. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. Association for Computational Linguistics, 41714186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [11] Dey Kuntal, Shrivastava Ritvik, and Kaushik Saroj. 2018. Topical stance detection for Twitter: A two-phase LSTM model using attention. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Retrieval. Springer, 529536.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] Du Jiachen, Xu Ruifeng, He Yulan, and Gui Lin. 2017. Stance classification with target-specific neural attention networks. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. [13] Gao Tianyu, Fisch Adam, and Chen Danqi. 2021. Making pre-trained language models better few-shot learners. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, 38163830.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Hardalov Momchil, Arora Arnav, Nakov Preslav, and Augenstein Isabelle. 2022. Few-shot cross-lingual stance detection with sentiment-based pre-training. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1072910737.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] He Zihao, Mokhberian Negar, and Lerman Kristina. 2022. Infusing Wikipedia knowledge to enhance stance detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.03839 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Hu Shengding, Ding Ning, Wang Huadong, Liu Zhiyuan, Li Juanzi, and Sun Maosong. 2021. Knowledgeable prompt-tuning: Incorporating knowledge into prompt verbalizer for text classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.02035 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. [17] Hu Shengding, Ding Ning, Wang Huadong, Liu Zhiyuan, Wang Jingang, Li Juanzi, Wu Wei, and Sun Maosong. 2022. Knowledgeable prompt-tuning: Incorporating knowledge into prompt verbalizer for text classification. In Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 22252240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. [18] Huang Binxuan, Ou Yanglan, and Carley Kathleen M.. 2018. Aspect level sentiment classification with attention-over-attention neural networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Computing, Behavioral-Cultural Modeling and Prediction and Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation. Springer, 197206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Jain Rachna, Jain Deepak Kumar, Dharana, and Sharma Nitika. 2022. Fake news classification: A quantitative research description. ACM Trans. Asian Low Resour. Lang. Inf. Process. 21, 1 (2022), 3:1–3:17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Jiang Yan, Gao Jinhua, Shen Huawei, and Cheng Xueqi. 2022. Few-shot stance detection via target-aware prompt distillation. In Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 837847.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Küçük Dilek and Can Fazli. 2020. Stance detection: A survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 53, 1 (2020), 137.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. [22] Li Chengxi, Gao Feiyu, Bu Jiajun, Xu Lu, Chen Xiang, Gu Yu, Shao Zirui, Zheng Qi, Zhang Ningyu, Wang Yongpan et al. 2021. Sentiprompt: Sentiment knowledge enhanced prompt-tuning for aspect-based sentiment analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.08306 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. [23] Li Chen, Peng Hao, Li Jianxin, Sun Lichao, Lyu Lingjuan, Wang Lihong, Yu Philip S., and He Lifang. 2022. Joint stance and rumor detection in hierarchical heterogeneous graph. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 33, 6 (2022), 25302542.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Li Yingjie and Caragea Cornelia. 2019. Multi-task stance detection with sentiment and stance lexicons. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP). 62996305.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Li Yingjie, Sosea Tiberiu, Sawant Aditya, Nair Ajith Jayaraman, Inkpen Diana, and Caragea Cornelia. 2021. P-stance: A large dataset for stance detection in political domain. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] Liang Bin, Chen Zixiao, Gui Lin, He Yulan, Yang Min, and Xu Ruifeng. 2022. Zero-shot stance detection via contrastive learning. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference. 27382747.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. [27] Liang Bin, Fu Yonghao, Gui Lin, Yang Min, Du Jiachen, He Yulan, and Xu Ruifeng. 2021. Target-adaptive graph for cross-target stance detection. In Proceedings of the Web Conference. 34533464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Liu Rui, Lin Zheng, Tan Yutong, and Wang Weiping. 2021. Enhancing zero-shot and few-shot stance detection with commonsense knowledge graph. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 31523157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Mohammad Saif, Kiritchenko Svetlana, Sobhani Parinaz, Zhu Xiao-Dan, and Cherry Colin. 2016. SemEval-2016 task 6: Detecting stance in tweets. In Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation. 3141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. [30] Popat Kashyap, Mukherjee Subhabrata, Yates Andrew, and Weikum Gerhard. 2019. STANCY: Stance classification based on consistency cues. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, 64136418. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. [31] Rani Sujata and Kumar Parteek. 2022. Aspect-based sentiment analysis using dependency parsing. ACM Trans. Asian Low Resour. Lang. Inf. Process. 21, 3 (2022), 56:1–56:19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. [32] Schick Timo, Schmid Helmut, and Schütze Hinrich. 2020. Automatically identifying words that can serve as labels for few-shot text classification. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 55695578.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. [33] Schick Timo and Schütze Hinrich. 2021. Exploiting cloze-questions for few-shot text classification and natural language inference. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 255269.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. [34] Shin Taylor, Razeghi Yasaman, IV Robert L. Logan, Wallace Eric, and Singh Sameer. 2020. AutoPrompt: Eliciting knowledge from language models with automatically generated prompts. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, 42224235.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. [35] Sobhani Parinaz, Inkpen Diana, and Zhu Xiaodan. 2017. A dataset for multi-target stance detection. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 551557.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. [36] Somasundaran Swapna and Wiebe Janyce. 2009. Recognizing stances in online debates. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP. Association for Computational Linguistics, 226234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. [37] Sun Qingying, Wang Zhongqing, Zhu Qiaoming, and Zhou Guodong. 2018. Stance detection with hierarchical attention network. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 23992409.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. [38] Tang Duyu, Qin Bing, and Liu Ting. 2016. Aspect level sentiment classification with deep memory network. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Walker Marilyn A., Anand Pranav, Abbott Robert, and Grant Ricky. 2012. Stance classification using dialogic properties of persuasion. In Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. Association for Computational Linguistics, 592596.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. [40] Wang Limin and Wang Dexin. 2021. Solving stance detection on tweets as multi-domain and multi-task text classification. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 157780157789.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. [41] Wei Penghui, Lin Junjie, and Mao Wenji. 2018. Multi-target stance detection via a dynamic memory-augmented network. In Proceedings of the 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 12291232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. [42] Wei Penghui and Mao Wenji. 2019. Modeling transferable topics for cross-target stance detection. In Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 11731176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Xu Chang, Paris Cecile, Nepal Surya, and Sparks Ross. 2018. Cross-target stance classification with self-attention networks. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 778783.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. [44] Yang Min, Jiang Qingnan, Shen Ying, Wu Qingyao, Zhao Zhou, and Zhou Wei. 2019. Hierarchical human-like strategy for aspect-level sentiment classification with sentiment linguistic knowledge and reinforcement learning. Neural Netw. 117 (2019), 240248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Yang Min, Zhao Wei, Chen Lei, Qu Qiang, Zhao Zhou, and Shen Ying. 2019. Investigating the transferring capability of capsule networks for text classification. Neural Netw. 118 (2019), 247261.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. [46] Zhang Bowen, Yang Min, Li Xutao, Ye Yunming, Xu Xiaofei, and Dai Kuai. 2020. Enhancing cross-target stance detection with transferable semantic-emotion knowledge. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 31883197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. [47] Zhang Chen, Li Qiuchi, and Song Dawei. 2019. Aspect-based sentiment classification with aspect-specific graph convolutional networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.03477 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. [48] Zhang Xin, Yuan Jianhua, Zhao Yanyan, and Qin Bing. 2021. Knowledge enhanced target-aware stance detection on tweets. In Proceedings of the China Conference on Knowledge Graph and Semantic Computing. Springer, 171184.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Zhang Yazhou, Tiwari Prayag, Song Dawei, Mao Xiaoliu, Wang Panpan, Li Xiang, and Pandey Hari Mohan. 2021. Learning interaction dynamics with an interactive LSTM for conversational sentiment analysis. Neural Netw. 133 (2021), 4056.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Knowledge-enhanced Prompt-tuning for Stance Detection

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing
      ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing  Volume 22, Issue 6
      June 2023
      635 pages
      ISSN:2375-4699
      EISSN:2375-4702
      DOI:10.1145/3604597
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 16 June 2023
      • Online AM: 23 March 2023
      • Accepted: 13 March 2023
      • Revised: 8 January 2023
      • Received: 8 October 2022
      Published in tallip Volume 22, Issue 6

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)221
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)59

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    View Full Text
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!