Style mining of electronic messages for multiple authorship discrimination: First results

Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 475-480

  Argamon, Shlomo ^a   Šarić, Marin ^a   Stein, Sterling S ^a  

^a Illinois Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Authorship attribution; Computational stylistics; Electronic communication; Text categorization; Text mining

Indexed keywords

AUTHORSHIP ATTRIBUTION; CLASSIFICATION ACCURACY; ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS; ELECTRONIC MESSAGE; MULTI-CLASS; TEXT CATEGORIZATION; TEXT MINING; VECTOR REPRESENTATIONS; WINNOW ALGORITHM;

DATA MINING; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT; LEARNING ALGORITHMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; TEXT PROCESSING;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 18744405825     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/956750.956805     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. S. Argamon, M. Koppel, J. Fine, and A. R. Shimony. Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text, 23 (3), 2003.
2. J. F. Burrows. Computers and the study of literature. In Computers and Written Texts, pages 167-204. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.
3. K. Crammer and Y. Singer. Ultraconservative online algorithms for multiclass problems. In Proc. COLT/EuroCOLT, pages 99-115, Amsterdam, 2001.
4. N. Cristianini and J. Shawe-Taylor. An Introduction To Support Vector Machines. Cambridge U. Press, 2000.
5. I. Dagan, Y. Karov, and D. Roth. Mistake-driven learning in text categorization. In Proc. EMNLP-97, Providence, RI.
6. O. de Vel. Mining e-mail authorship. In KDD-2000 Workshop on Text Mining, Boston, MA, 2000.
7. R. S. Forsyth and D. I. Holmes. Feature finding for text classification. Lit. and Ling. Comp., 11 (4):163-174, 1996.
8. S. Har-Peled, D. Roth, and D. Zimak. Constraint classification for multiclass classification and ranking. In NIPS-15, 2002.
9. D. I. Holmes. The evolution of stylometry in humanities scholarship. Lit. and Ling. Comp., 13 (3):111-117, 1998.
10. J. Karlgren. Stylistic Experiments for Information Retrieval. PhD thesis, SICS, 2000.
11. J. Kivinen and M. Warmuth. Exponentiated gradient versus gradient descent for linear predictors. Information and Computation, 132 (1):1-63, 1997.
12. M. Koppel, S. Argamon, and A. R. Shimoni. Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender. Lit. and Ling. Comp., 17 (4), 2003.
13. R. A. J. Matthews and T. V. N. Merriam. Neural computation in stylometry I: An application to the works of Shakespeare and Fletcher. Lit. and Ling. Comp., 8:103-209, 1993.
14. A. McEnery and M. Oakes. Authorship studies/textual statistics, pages 234-248. Marcel Dekker, 2000.
15. R. Mitton. Spelling checkers, spelling correctors and the misspellings of poor spellers. Information Processing and Management, 23 (5):495-505, 1987.
16. F. Mosteller and D. Wallace. Inference and Disputed Authorship: The Federalist. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1964.
17. F. Sebastiani. Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Computing Surveys, 34 (1), 2002.
18. E. Stamatatos, N. Fakotakis, and G. Kokkinakis. Automatic text categorisation in terms of genre and author. Comp. Ling., 26 (4):471-495, 2001.
19. F. Tweedie, S. Singh, and D. Holmes. Neural network applications in stylometry: The federalist papers. Computers and the Humanities, 30 (1):1-10, 1996.
20. M. Wolters and M. Kirsten. Exploring the use of linguistic features in domain and genre classication. In Proc. EACL '99, pages 142-149, 1999.
21. G. U. Yule. Statistical Study of Literary Vocabulary. Cambridge U. Press, 1944.