MavenRank: Identifying influential members of the US senate using lexical centrality

EMNLP-CoNLL 2007 - Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 658-666

  Fader, Anthony ^a   Radev, Dragomir ^a   Crespin, Michael H ^b   Monroe, Burt L ^c   Quinn, Kevin M ^d   Colaresi, Michael ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^c PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RANDOM WALK; US SENATE;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 46249125509     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. David Blei and John Lafferty. 2006. Dynamic topic models. In Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Conference (ICML).
2. David M. Blei, Andrew Y. Ng, and Michael I. Jordan. 2003. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993-1022.
3. Sergey Brin and Lawrence Page. 1998. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1-7):107-117.
4. Güneş Erkan and Dragomir R. Radev. 2004. Lexrank: Graph-based centrality as salience in text summarization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR).
5. Gunes Erkan. 2006. Language model-based document clustering using random walks. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the NAACL, Main Conference, pages 479-486, New York City, USA, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.
6. L. C. Freeman. 1977. A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1):35-41, March.
7. Malcolm Gladwell. 2002. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Back Bay Books, January.
8. Richard L. Hall. 1996. Participation in Congress. Yale University Press.
9. Jon M. Kleinberg. 1998. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 668-677.
10. Oren Kurland and Lillian Lee. 2005. PageRank without hyperlinks: Structural re-ranking using links induced by language models. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 306-313.
11. Oren Kurland and Lillian Lee. 2006. Respect my authority! HITS without hyperlinks, utilizing cluster-based language models. In Proceedings of SIGIR, pages 83- 90.
12. Ziheng Lin and Min-Yen Kan. 2007. Timestamped graphs: Evolutionary models of text for multidocument summarization. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on TextGraphs: Graph-Based Algorithms for Natural Language Processing, pages 25-32, Rochester, NY, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Geoffrey McLachlan and David Peel. 2000. Finite Mixture Models. New York: Wiley.
14. Rada Mihalcea and Paul Tarau. 2004. TextRank: Bringing order into texts. In Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP'04).
15. Rada Mihalcea, Paul Tarau, and Elizabeth Figa. 2004. Pagerank on semantic networks, with application to word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING'04), pages 1126-1132.
16. Burt L. Monroe, Cheryl L. Monroe, Kevin M. Quinn, Dragomir Radev, Michael H. Crespin, Michael P. Colaresi, Anthony Fader, Jacob Balazer, and Steven P. Abney. 2006. United states congressional speech corpus. Department of Political Science, The Pennsylvania State University.
17. Mark E. J. Newman. 2003. A measure of betweenness centrality based on random walks. Technical Report cond-mat/0309045, Arxiv.org.
18. Lawrence Page, Sergey Brin, Rajeev Motwani, and Terry Winograd. 1999. The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to theWeb. Technical Report 1999-66, Stanford Digital Library Technologies Project, Stanford University, November 11,.
19. Mason A. Porter, Peter J. Mucha, M. E. J. Newman, and Casey M. Warmbrand. 2005. A network analysis of committees in the u.s. house of representatives. PNAS, 102(20), May.
20. Kevin M. Quinn, Burt L. Monroe, Michael Colaresi, Michael H. Crespin, and Dragomir R. Radev. 2006. An automated method of topic-coding legislative speech over time with application to the 105th-108th U.S. senate. In Midwest Political Science Association Meeting.
21. K. Sparck-Jones. 1972. A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval. Journal of Documentation, 28(1):11-20.
22. Charles Stewart and Jonathan Woon. 2005. Congressional committee assignments, 103rd to 105th congresses, 1993-1998: Senate, july 12, 2005. http://web.mit.edu/17.251/www/data-page.html.
23. Matt Thomas, Bo Pang, and Lillian Lee. 2006. Get out the vote: Determining support or opposition from Congressional floor-debate transcripts. In Proceedings of EMNLP, pages 327-335.
24. Hanghang Tong and Christos Faloutsos. 2006. Centerpiece subgraphs: problem definition and fast solutions. In Tina Eliassi-Rad, Lyle H. Ungar, Mark Craven, and Dimitrios Gunopulos, editors, KDD, pages 404-413. ACM.
25. Xuerui Wang, Natasha Mohanty, and Andrew McCallum. 2005. Group and topic discovery from relations and their attributes. In NIPS.