Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (4) (remove)
Document Type
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4) (remove)
Keywords
- Corpus technology (4) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (4) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (4)
Publisher
The Manatee corpus management system on which the Sketch Engine is built is efficient, but unable to harness the power of today’s multiprocessor machines. We describe a new, compatible implementation of Manatee which we develop in the Go language and report on the performance gains that we obtained.
Corpus researchers, along with many other disciplines in science are being put under continual pressure to show accountability and reproducibility in their work. This is unsurprisingly difficult when the researcher is faced with a wide array of methods and tools through which to do their work; simply tracking the operations done can be problematic, especially when toolchains are often configured by the developers, but left largely as a black box to the user. Here we present a scheme for encoding this ‘meta data’ inside the corpus files themselves in a structured data format, along with a proof-of-concept tool to record the operations performed on a file.
This article describes a series of ongoing efforts at the Stanford Literary Lab to manage a large collection of literary corpora (~40 billion words). This work is marked by a tension between two competing requirements – the corpora need to be merged together into higher-order collections that can be analyzed as units; but, at the same time, it’s also necessary to preserve granular access to the original metadata and relational organization of each individual corpus. We describe a set of data management practices that try to accommodate both of these requirements – Apache Spark is used to index data as Parquet tables on an HPC cluster at Stanford. Crucially, the approach distinguishes between what we call “canonical” and “combined” corpora, a variation on the well-established notion of a “virtual corpus” (Kupietz et al., 2014; Jakubíek et al., 2014; van Uytvanck, 2010).
Unlike traditional text corpora collected from trustworthy sources, the content of web based corpora has to be filtered. This study briefly discusses the impact of web spam on corpus usability and emphasizes the importance of removing computer generated text from web corpora.
The paper also presents a keyword comparison of an unfiltered corpus with the same collection of texts cleaned by a supervised classifier trained using FastText. The classifier was able to recognize 71% of web spam documents similar to the training set but lacked both precision and recall when applied to short texts from another data set.