Now on ScienceBlogs: HeartlandGate: Anti-Science Institute's Insider Reveals Secrets

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Omni Brain

An exploration of the serious/fun/ridiculous - past/present/future of the brain and the science that loves it.

The Homunculus

steve_icon_medium.jpgSteve Higgins is sometimes a Psychologist, sometimes a Neuroscientist, and sometimes even a Human Factors Engineer. He works for the U.S. Government. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois in Psychology.

Search

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Archives

Blogroll


Bloggers' Rights at EFF


Openlab 2007


Glial Cells

Access Omni Brain mobile here.

Access Omni Brain email here.

Axons

« The Invisible Gorilla | Main | Winnie the Pooh does animated mental disorders »

A computer that can detect sarcasm

Category: HumorLanguageTechnology
Posted on: May 18, 2010 2:46 PM, by The Omnibrain

Straight from Neatorama:

A research team at Hebrew University in Israel has developed a computer program that can recognize sarcasm with about 77% accuracy:

To create such an algorithm, the team scanned 66,000 Amazon.com product reviews, with three different human annotators tagging sentences for sarcasm. The team then identified certain sarcastic patterns that emerged in the reviews and created a classification algorithm that puts each statement into a sarcastic class.

The algorithms were then trained on that seed set of 80 sentences from the collection of reviews. These annotated sentences helped the algorithm learn what sorts of words and patterns distinguish sarcastic remarks - those that mean the opposite of what they literally convey, or that convey a sentiment inconsistent with the literal reading.

Wow that's so totally interesting and amazing!

(I'll bet my comment easily falls into the 33% of sarcasm that the computer doesn't detect)

dilbert-sarcasm-supportiveness-difference.jpg
Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/139651

Comments

1

So, the methodology involved humans first identifying sarcastic comments. The 77% accuracy is probably just how closely the computer matched what humans found to be sarcastic. Anecdotal evidence has taught me that less then 20% of humans seem able to detect sarcasm, so the computer only would detect about 15% of all sarcasm.

Interesting, amazing, and at least as accurate as anti ballistic missile defense systems! I foresee huge government contracts for this technology with immediate deployment in the Senate chambers.

Posted by: Ken Author Profile Page | May 18, 2010 4:54 PM

2

Oh, a sarcasm detector. That's really useful!

[serious]Though I'm sure everyone knows that quote. As long as this one doesn't have problems when it gets overloaded.[/serious]

Posted by: Katherine | May 18, 2010 6:45 PM

3

Erm, 100 - 77 = 23

Posted by: HJ Hornbeck | May 18, 2010 6:56 PM

4

77% accuracy makes that program better at detecting sarcasm than the average Internet reader.

Posted by: Thomas | May 19, 2010 5:43 AM

5

That really is interesting and amazing.

Better yet, they'll have Don Rickles to try it out on. (However, they should be cautious; this could lead to the overload Katherine warned about.)

Posted by: Chris Winter | May 19, 2010 5:55 PM

6

Next we'll have an application that generates sarcasm. Imagine the possibilities! Nobody's job is safe anymore. (I'm looking at you, Jon Stewart.)

Posted by: John | May 20, 2010 11:24 PM

7

"77% accuracy makes that program better at detecting sarcasm than the average Internet reader."

haha, great remark, i've just thought the same after reading this post ;)

Posted by: strony internetowe kraków | May 21, 2010 4:11 AM

8

Interesting, amazing, and at least as accurate as anti ballistic missile defense systems! I foresee huge government contracts for this technology with immediate deployment in the Senate chambers.

Posted by: red pepper | May 31, 2010 3:53 PM

9

Better yet, they'll have Don Rickles to try it out on. (However, they should be cautious; this could lead to the overload Katherine warned about

Posted by: fix it pro | June 1, 2010 9:06 AM

10

Suffer from chronic pain and if anyone can advise me on what medications to use only contact me on Twitter.

Posted by: kimmy_kard | July 30, 2010 11:29 AM

11

Oh, a sarcasm detector. That's really useful!

[serious]Though I'm sure everyone knows that quote. As long as this one doesn't have problems when it gets overloaded.[/serious]

Posted by: katliamturk | October 8, 2010 11:30 AM

12

That really is interesting and amazing.

Better yet, they'll have Don Rickles to try it out on. (However, they should be cautious; this could lead to the overload Katherine warned about.)

Posted by: mediocrity car | October 20, 2010 10:56 AM

13

Now we can not wait, but health reform should be established in a way that the beneficiaries are those who suffer everyday with different diseases such as cancer, Parkinson's, arthritis, diseases that are painful and have to suffer day after day, for them must be a priority.

Ely Lilly
Findrxonline

Posted by: Ely Lilly | October 22, 2010 2:33 PM

14

metin2 hile oyunlarının tek adresi bizim sitemizdir yüzlerce metin2 hilesini bularak indirebilirsiniz son cıkan güncel oyun hileleri ve nice eklenen yüzlerce metin2 hile sizleri bekliyor türkiyenin tek güncel hile sitesiyiz suanlık

Posted by: metin2 hile | October 27, 2010 3:59 AM

15

Don Rickles to try it out on. (However, they should be cautious; this could lead to the overload Katherine warned about Oh, thank you for you good.

Posted by: Sesli | October 29, 2010 5:27 PM

16

Interesting, amazing, and at least as accurate as anti ballistic missile defense systems! I foresee huge government contracts for this technology with immediate deployment in the Senate chambers.

Posted by: döküm tava | October 31, 2010 9:35 PM

17

100 - 77 = 23 (%)

Posted by: Hadnagy Laszlo | December 19, 2010 2:26 AM

18

@Ken: "Anecdotal evidence has taught me that less then 20% of humans seem able to detect sarcasm, so the computer only would detect about 15% of all sarcasm."

Even if only 20% of humans detected sarcasm, that would not translate to only 20% of sarcasm being detected, thus your considering the 77% of 20% sarcasm is wrong.

Posted by: Hadnagy Laszlo | December 19, 2010 2:39 AM

19

@Hadnagy: "100 - 77 = 23 (%)"

no really?

Posted by: The Omnibrain | December 19, 2010 10:30 AM

20

That is truly amazing a computer program that can detect sarcasm...imagine that as your GPS voice when you make a wrong turn

Posted by: Ocala Florida Real Estate | January 4, 2011 1:27 AM

21

hahaha u'r all funny!!!

Posted by: ksbjane | January 6, 2011 8:19 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.