Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Building the PoliMedia search system; data- and user-driven

422

Published on

Presentation at eHumanities group at Meerten's Institute (Amsterdam) on Thursday 18 April 2013. …

Presentation at eHumanities group at Meerten's Institute (Amsterdam) on Thursday 18 April 2013.

Analysing media coverage across several types of media-outlets is a challenging task for (media) historians. A specific example of media coverage research investigates the coverage of political debates and how the representation of topics and people change over time. The PoliMedia project (http://www.polimedia.nl) aims to showcase the potential of cross-media analysis for research in the humanities, by 1) curating automatically detected semantic links between four data sets of different media types, and 2) developing a demonstrator application that allows researchers to deploy such an interlinked collection for quantitative and qualitative analysis of media coverage of debates in the Dutch parliament.

These two goals reflect the two perspectives on the development of a search system such as PoliMedia; data- and user-driven. In this presentation, Laura Hollink (VU) will present the data-driven perspective of linking between different datasets and the research questions that arise in achieving this linkage: how to combine different types of datasets and what kind of research questions are made possible by the data? Max Kemman (EUR) will present the user-driven perspective: which benefits can scholars have from linking of these datasets? What are the user requirements for the PoliMedia search system and how was the system evaluated with scholars in an eye tracking study?

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
422
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Create explicit links.
  • Go to archives, look up original data, decide whether there is a link to a debate.
  • Many systems, cross media analysis is difficult.
  • Debates.
  • used to check models, summarize the corpus, and guide exploration of its contents
  • Manual evaluation of relevance media items to political speech? = unsure about relevance0 = not relevant1 = partially relevant2 = relevant
  • Context metadata:Roles of peopleLinks toexternal databasesTypes of documentsTypes of presentation (dramatic, humoristic, etc.)
  • Transcript

    • 1. www.polimedia.nlBuilding the PoliMedia system;data- and user-driven
    • 2. Who are we?Laura Hollink• Assistant professor at VU• Modeling, linking and enrichmentof data• Data-driven research• @laurahollinkMax Kemman• Junior researcher at EUR• Human-Computer Interaction• User-driven research• @MaxJ_KeHumanities group - PoliMedia 2PoliMedia teamHenri Beunders (EUR)Jaap Blom (NISV)Laura Hollink (VU)Geert-Jan Houben (TU Delft)Funded by CLARIN-NLDamir Juric (TU Delft)Max Kemman (EUR)Martijn Kleppe (EUR)Johan Oomen (NISV)
    • 3. Linking Politics to MediaeHumanities group - PoliMedia 3
    • 4. The research questions• How is a person, subject or process covered & visualised by the media?• How do debates and arguments develop over a longer period of time?• Analysing the changing ideas, arguments and presentation in differentmediaeHumanities group - PoliMedia 4
    • 5. eHumanities group - PoliMedia 5Issues with current approach
    • 6. eHumanities group - PoliMedia 6Issues with current approach
    • 7. Goal: explicit links to different mediatypes in one systemeHumanities group - PoliMedia 7
    • 8. PoliMedia systemeHumanities group - PoliMedia 8PoliMediaPortal- Browse:debate anddate- Search:debate andpersonNewspapersKBTelevisionSound and VisionRadioKBStatenGeneraalDigitaalKBData-driven (Laura) & user-driven (Max)
    • 9. DataeHumanities group - PoliMedia 9
    • 10. Debate dataHandelingen der Staten-General or Dutch Hansardfrom 1945-1995Some provenance:1. Transcripts are made of the complete debates of the Dutchparliament.2. Published online by the government onhttp://www.statengeneraaldigitaal.nl/ (1818 1995) andhttp://officielebekendmakingen.nl/ (from 1995)3. PoliticalMashup project has translated government pdf andtxt files into XML, incl URI’s as identifiers, seehttp://politicalmashup.nl/4. We build on that.
    • 11. eHumanities group - PoliMedia 11DebateMetadataTopic 1Topic 2Speaker 1 / ContentSpeaker 2 / ContentSpeaker 3 / ContentSpeaker 1 / ContentStructureof thedebate dataIncluding:• who, when, what• identifiers for subpartsof the debate• chronological order ofspeakers
    • 12. Media data• Newspaper articles– at the National Library of theNetherlands– Many newspapers 1950- 1995– Text + images of newspaperlayout• Radio bulletins– Transcripts of ANP news• Newscasts– in the Academia collection of theNetherlands institute for Soundand Vision
    • 13. Semantic modelnl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002nl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002.1PartOfDebateDebatehttp://resolver.politicalmashup.nl/nl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002http://statengeneraaldigitaal.nl/http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=sgd:mpeg21:19451946:0000002:pdfnl.proc.sgd.d.19720000002Handelingen VerenigdeVergadering...Dutch1945-11-20rdf:typedc:iddc:sourcedc:sourcedc:publisherdc:languagedc:datehasPartrdf:typenl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002.1.1hasPartDebateContextrdf:typenl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002.1.2Speechrdf:typehasPartnl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002.1.3hasSubsequentSpeech"Mijnheer deVoorzitter, deCommissievan …"hasSpokenTextsem:hasActor"De voorzitteropent devergadering…"hasTexthttp://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011198136:mpeg21:a0525:ocrcoveredInnl.proc.sgd.d.194519460000002.2hasSubsequentPartOfDebate
    • 14. Semantic modelsem:hasActorSpeaker_00064Party_kvphasPartyhasSpeakermember_of_parliamentPartyKVPKatholieke Volkspartijrdf:typehasAcronymhasFullNameJoannes Antonius JamesBargefoaf:firstNamefoaf:lastNameBargerdfs:labelhttp://resolver.politicalmashup.nl/nl.m.00064dc:sourcePoliticianrdf:typehasRoleReuse of vocabularies:Simple Event Model (SEM),Dublin Core, FOAF, links toISOCAT data categories.
    • 15. Linked DataeHumanities group - PoliMedia 15• Data openly accessible in a semantic Web standard• Easy to combine with other semantic Web data• E.g. DBpedia data on politicians and parties.
    • 16. Linking Debates to Newspaperarticles that cover them• Challenges:– How to link documents that are so different innature?– Can we use the structure of the debates: people,chronologic order of speeches, introductions toeach new topic, etc.– How can we do this efficiently, using the accessmechanisms of the archives?eHumanities group - PoliMedia 16
    • 17. Linking approacheHumanities group - PoliMedia 17Detecttopics inspeechesCreatequeriesSearchnewspaperarchiveTopicsNamedEntitiesName ofspeakerDetectNamedEntities inspeechesCandidatearticlesQueriesRankcandidatearticlesLinksbetweenspeechesand articlesDebatesDate ofdebate
    • 18. Detect topicsThe MALLET topic model package• Unsupervised analysis of text• “a Topic consists of a cluster of words that frequently occur together”• [see http://mallet.cs.umass.edu/topics.php]• Input:– Text– Number of iterations– Number of topics/clusters• Output:– Words that cluster around one topic.• Example:– Text: a speech in a debate from 1975– number of iterations: 2000– number of topics: 1
    • 19. Create QuerieseHumanities group - PoliMedia 19NamedEntities fromthe speechNamedEntities fromthe debateintroTopics fromthe speechTopics fromthe debateintroName ofspeaker Date of debateNamedEntities fromthe speechNamedEntities fromthe debateintroTopics fromthe speechTopics fromthe debateintro
    • 20. Evaluation• Experiment 1: NEs in speech• Experiment 2: NEs + topics in speech• Experiment 3: NEs + topics in speech and debateeHumanities group - PoliMedia 20
    • 21. Results• A linked open data set of Dutch parliamentarydebates.• With links to URL’s of news paper articles andradio bulletins at the Royal Library.• A system that supports researchers in findingthe data to answer their questions.eHumanities group - PoliMedia 21
    • 22. User-drivenWhat do scholars want?• Why user research?• Understanding the user [1, 2]– Acceptance– Performance– Capabilities– Weaknesses• Goal– Creating a system that is intuitive and helpful to the users[1] Y. Liu, A. Osvalder, and M. Karlsson, “Considering the importance of user profiles ininterface design,” no. May, 2010[2] J. Preece, Y. Rogers, and H. Sharp, “Interaction Design: Beyond Human-ComputerInteraction,” Design, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 68-68, 2002eHumanities group - PoliMedia 22
    • 23. User research in the developmentprocess• Examine search behaviour of users– Survey regarding search strategies– Interviews• User wishes → user requirements• Wireframes → Prototype• Evaluation →New prioritization of remaininguser requirements• Final versioneHumanities group - PoliMedia 23
    • 24. SurveyGeneral search strategies• N=294• Popular search enginesVery oftenOftenRegularlySometimesNeverDon’tknow itGoogleGoogleImagesGoogleScholarYouTubeJSTORKBFlickrEBSCONationaalArchiefWebofKnowledgeUitzendingGemistYahoo!BingAcademia.nlEuropeanaScopusMicrosoftAcademicSearchEUscreenArkyves24
    • 25. SurveyGeneral search strategies1. Keywords 4,752. Advanced search 3,363. Related terms 2,524. Boolean 2,425. Browsing subjectcategories 2,296. Filters 2,197. Thesaurus 1,878. Visualization 1,22eHumanities group - PoliMedia 25
    • 26. SurveyConclusions• Google is the dominant search engine• This has two consequences1. People compare other search systems to theirexperience with Google2. The search task is mainly performed by usingkeywordseHumanities group - PoliMedia 26
    • 27. Interviews• N=5• Quantitative (n=2) as well as qualitative (n=4)• Main themes– How do people search currently?– What could be improved about current search systems?– What should PoliMedia offer, given its goals?• Results– 39 user wishes– Prioritized internally• 19 user wishes deemed out of scope• 20 user requirementseHumanities group - PoliMedia 27
    • 28. InterviewsFindings• Key issue is to provide a good overview of data– Why are search results retrieved– How are search results ranked• Assumptions of relevance– Higher frequency of keywords indicated higher relevancy toquery?– Longer segments (speeches and articles) indicate higherimportance?• Many more or less out-of-scope wishes to make currentresearch easier– Sentiment-metadata– Context metadata– Ability to export to own softwareeHumanities group - PoliMedia 28
    • 29. • Clear andimmediatekeyword-search• Support forBooleans and(some) Google-search operators• Separateadvanced-searcheHumanities group - PoliMedia 29WireframesSearch interface
    • 30. WireframesSearch results• Keyword searchremainsprominent• User chosenranking of results• Keywordhighlighting• Overview ofrelated media• Support forfilteringeHumanities group - PoliMedia 30
    • 31. WireframesDebate page• Keyword searchremainsprominent• Overview ofpeople in debate• Easy access torelated material31eHumanities group - PoliMedia
    • 32. Prototype v1.0eHumanities group - PoliMedia 32
    • 33. Evaluation• Eye tracking evaluation of the search system– Search system was still in development• N=24– History– Political communication• Goals– Gain understanding of distribution of attention– Collect general feedback on interfaceeHumanities group - PoliMedia 33
    • 34. EvaluationEye tracking• Viewing Duration• Search bar received little attention aftersearch results were displayed• Facets received a lot of attention• Page-search (CTRL+F) mainly receivedattention on debate page vieweHumanities group - PoliMedia 34Tasks Search bar Facets Search results Page-searchKnown Item 17% 22% 60% 2%Exploratory 6% 12% 80% 2%
    • 35. EvaluationUsability feedback• The ranking of search results was an issue forusers• The year-filter should be a slider• The debate page should be greatly improved– Better identification for speaker, party, topic,relevance to query– Provide filters on debate-page as welleHumanities group - PoliMedia 35
    • 36. Prototype v2.0eHumanities group - PoliMedia 36
    • 37. Prototype v2.0 - queryeHumanities group - PoliMedia 37
    • 38. Prototype v2.0 – filter speakereHumanities group - PoliMedia 38
    • 39. Prototype v2.0 - filter roleeHumanities group - PoliMedia 39
    • 40. Prototype v2.0 - debateeHumanities group - PoliMedia 40
    • 41. Prototype v2.0 - highlight speecheHumanities group - PoliMedia 41
    • 42. Prototype v2.0 - link newspapereHumanities group - PoliMedia 42
    • 43. Prototype v2.0 - newspapereHumanities group - PoliMedia 43
    • 44. Prototype v2.0 - link radioeHumanities group - PoliMedia 44
    • 45. Conclusion• PoliMedia; data- or user-driven?• Continuous interplay– Users gave input for usefulness of links– Data limits what features we can offer to users• Collection quality and usability are both critical tousers [3][3] Xie, I. (2006). Evaluation of digital libraries: Criteria and problems from users’perspectives. Library & Information Science Research, 28(3), 433–452.doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2006.06.002eHumanities group - PoliMedia 45

    ×