Difference between revisions of "Research"

(Bayesian Modeling)
(Bayesian Modeling)
Line 26: Line 26:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| colspan="3" align="center" |
 
| colspan="3" align="center" |
{| border="0"
+
 
|+ ''A table in a table''
+
While I agree with Reviewer 3 that the experiments involve an admirable diversity of datasets (as compared to a typical NIPS paper), I personally don't feel that the contribution has been compellingly described or validated, and suspect on the basis of the presentation that the actual improvements are pretty marginal. I attached a confidence of 4 to my review partly because of the difficulty I had in assessing the precise contribution --- I read and write lots of structured generative models and it took several tries for me to get a sense for how exactly this paper differed from previous efforts --- and partly because I'm not in the trenches of jointly modeling text and relational data, so maybe somebody closer to those datasets would be more informed and therefore more impressed by the results as reported.
|-
+
 
| align="center" width="150" | [[File:Wiki.png]]
 
| align="center" width="150" | [[File:Wiki.png]]
 
|-
 
| align="center" colspan="2" style="border-top: 1px solid red;<!--
 
  --> border-right: 1px solid red; border-bottom: 2px solid red;<!--
 
  --> border-left: 1px solid red;" |
 
Two Wikipedia logos
 
|}
 
 
|}
 
|}

Revision as of 01:12, 11 August 2010

Machine Translation

Summarization

Parsing and Tagging

Sentiment Analysis

Bayesian Modeling

Cross‐language Bayesian models for Web‐scale text analysis using MapReduce
PI Jimmy Lin
Other Faculty Jordan Boyd-Graber, Philip Resnik
Students Lisa Simpson
Funding NSF 1018625

While I agree with Reviewer 3 that the experiments involve an admirable diversity of datasets (as compared to a typical NIPS paper), I personally don't feel that the contribution has been compellingly described or validated, and suspect on the basis of the presentation that the actual improvements are pretty marginal. I attached a confidence of 4 to my review partly because of the difficulty I had in assessing the precise contribution --- I read and write lots of structured generative models and it took several tries for me to get a sense for how exactly this paper differed from previous efforts --- and partly because I'm not in the trenches of jointly modeling text and relational data, so maybe somebody closer to those datasets would be more informed and therefore more impressed by the results as reported.