skip to main content
10.1145/2806416.2806485acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Extracting Situational Information from Microblogs during Disaster Events: a Classification-Summarization Approach

Published:17 October 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Microblogging sites like Twitter have become important sources of real-time information during disaster events. A significant amount of valuable situational information is available in these sites; however, this information is immersed among hundreds of thousands of tweets, mostly containing sentiments and opinion of the masses, that are posted during such events. To effectively utilize microblogging sites during disaster events, it is necessary to (i) extract the situational information from among the large amounts of sentiment and opinion, and (ii) summarize the situational information, to help decision-making processes when time is critical. In this paper, we develop a novel framework which first classifies tweets to extract situational information, and then summarizes the information. The proposed framework takes into consideration the typicalities pertaining to disaster events where (i) the same tweet often contains a mixture of situational and non-situational information, and (ii) certain numerical information, such as number of casualties, vary rapidly with time, and thus achieves superior performance compared to state-of-the-art tweet summarization approaches.

References

  1. M. A. Cameron, R. Power, B. Robinson, and J. Yin. Emergency Situation Awareness from Twitter for Crisis Management. In Proc. Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Chakrabarti and K. Punera. Event summarization using tweets. In Proc. AAAI ICWSM, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C.-C. Chang and C.-J. Lin. LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2:27:1--27:27, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. G. Erkan and D. R. Radev. LexRank:Graph-based lexical centrality as salience in text summarization. Artificial Intelligence Research, 22:457--479, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Gurobi -- The overall fastest and best supported solver available, 2015. http://www.gurobi.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Hannak, E. Anderson, L. F. Barrett, S. Lehmann, A. Mislove, and M. Riedewald. Tweetin' in the Rain: Exploring societal-scale effects of weather on mood. In Proc. AAAI ICWSM, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. C. Kedzie, K. McKeown, and F. Diaz. Summarizing Disasters Over Time. In Proc. Bloomberg Workshop on Social Good (with SIGKDD), 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. A. H. Khan, D. Bollegala, G. Liu, and K. Sezaki. Multi-Tweet Summarization of Real-Time Events. In Proc. IEEE Socialcom, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. L. Kong, N. Schneider, S. Swayamdipta, A. Bhatia, C. Dyer, and N. A. Smith. A Dependency Parser for Tweets. In Proc. EMNLP, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. C.-Y. Lin. ROUGE: A package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In Proc. Workshop on Text Summarization Branches Out (with ACL), 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 2015 Nepal earthquake -- Wikipedia, April 2015. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Nepal_.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. G. Neubig, Y. Matsubayashi, M. Hagiwara, and K. Murakami. Safety information mining -- what can NLP do in a disaster. In Proc. IJCNLP, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Olariu. Efficient online summarization of microblogging streams. In Proc. EACL, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M. Osborne et al. Real-Time Detection, Tracking, and Monitoring of Automatically Discovered Events in Social Media. In Proc. ACL, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. O. Owoputi, B. O'Connor, C. Dyer, K. Gimpel, N. Schneider, and N. A. Smith. Improved part-of-speech tagging for online conversational text with word clusters. In Proc. NAACL-HLT, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. D. Parveen and M. Strube. Multi-document Summarization Using Bipartite Graphs. In Proc. TextGraphs Workshop on Graph-based Methods for Natural Language Processing, pages 15--24, October 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Y. Qu, C. Huang, P. Zhang, and J. Zhang. Microblogging After a Major Disaster in China: A Case Study of the 2010 Yushu Earthquake. In Proc. ACM CSCW, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. R. Quirk, S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, J. Svartvik, and D. Crystal. A comprehensive grammar of the English language, volume 397. Cambridge University Press, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. T. Sakaki, M. Okazaki, and Y. Matsuo. Earthquake shakes Twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors. In Proc. World Wide Web Conference (WWW), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. N. B. Sarter and D. D. Woods. Situation awareness: a critical but ill-defined phenomenon. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1(1):45--57, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. L. Shou, Z. Wang, K. Chen, and G. Chen. Sumblr: Continuous summarization of evolving tweet streams. In Proc. ACM SIGIR, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. H. Takamura, H. Yokono, and M. Okumura. Summarizing a document stream. In Proc. ECIR, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. K. Tao, F. Abel, C. Hauff, G.-J. Houben, and U. Gadiraju. Groundhog Day: Near-duplicate Detection on Twitter. In Proc. World Wide Web Conference (WWW), 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. TREC Temporal Summarization, 2015. http://www.trec-ts.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. REST API Resources, Twitter Developers. https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. I. Varga, M. Sano, K. Torisawa, C. Hashimoto, K. Ohtake, T. Kawai, J.-H. Oh, and S. D. Saeger. Aid is out there: Looking for help from tweets during a large scale disaster. In Proc. ACL, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. S. Verma, S. Vieweg, W. J. Corvey, L. Palen, J. H. Martin, M. Palmer, A. Schram, and K. M. Anderson. Natural Language Processing to the Rescue? Extracting "Situational Awareness" Tweets During Mass Emergency. In Proc. AAAI ICWSM, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. S. Vieweg, A. L. Hughes, K. Starbird, and L. Palen. Microblogging During Two Natural Hazards Events: What Twitter May Contribute to Situational Awareness. In Proc. ACM SIGCHI, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. S. Volkova, T. Wilson, and D. Yarowsky. Exploring Sentiment in Social Media: Bootstrapping Subjectivity Clues from Multilingual Twitter Streams. In Proc. ACL, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. J. Yin, A. Lampert, M. Cameron, B. Robinson, and R. Power. Using Social Media to Enhance Emergency Situation Awareness. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27(6):52--59, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. A. Zubiaga, D. Spina, E. Amigo, and J. Gonzalo. Towards Real-Time Summarization of Scheduled Events from Twitter Streams. In Proc. ACM Hypertext, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Extracting Situational Information from Microblogs during Disaster Events: a Classification-Summarization Approach

          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
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CIKM '15: Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
            October 2015
            1998 pages
            ISBN:9781450337946
            DOI:10.1145/2806416

            Copyright © 2015 ACM

            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 ACM 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: 17 October 2015

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            CIKM '15 Paper Acceptance Rate165of646submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

            Upcoming Conference

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader