In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a 
. You have to answer the question based on the context.

Q: We collect data by using the Twitter API for saved data, available for public use. For our experiments we collect 3200 tweets filtered by keywords like “fire”, “earthquake”, “theft”, “robbery”, “drunk driving”, “drunk driving accident” etc.  
 Question: Do the tweets come from any individual?

A: Yes
****
Q: One way to analyze the model is to compute model gradients with respect to input features BIBREF26, BIBREF25. Figure FIGREF37 shows that in this particular example, the most important model inputs are verbs possibly associated with the entity butter, in addition to the entity's mentions themselves. It further shows that the model learns to extract shallow clues of identifying actions exerted upon only the entity being tracked, regardless of other entities, by leveraging verb semantics. 
 Question: What evidence do they present that the model attends to shallow context clues?

A: Using model gradients with respect to input features they presented that the most important model inputs are verbs associated with entities which shows that the model attends to shallow context clues
****
Q: We also consider the following baselines. BOW-Tags represents locations using a bag-of-words representation, using the same tag weighting as the embedding model. BOW-KL(Tags) uses the same representation but after term selection, using the same KL-based method as the embedding model. BOW-All combines the bag-of-words representation with the structured information, encoded as proposed in BIBREF7 . GloVe uses the objective from the original GloVe model for learning location vectors, i.e. this variant differs from EGEL-Tags in that instead of INLINEFORM1 we use the number of co-occurrences of tag INLINEFORM2 near location INLINEFORM3 , measured as INLINEFORM4 . 
 Question: what are the existing approaches?

A:
BOW-Tags BOW-KL(Tags) BOW-All GloVe
****