Datasets:
The viewer is disabled because this dataset repo requires arbitrary Python code execution. Please consider removing the loading script and relying on automated data support. If this is not possible, please open a discussion for direct help.
Dataset Card for broad_twitter_corpus
Dataset Summary
This is the Broad Twitter corpus, a dataset of tweets collected over stratified times, places and social uses. The goal is to represent a broad range of activities, giving a dataset more representative of the language used in this hardest of social media formats to process. Further, the BTC is annotated for named entities.
See the paper, Broad Twitter Corpus: A Diverse Named Entity Recognition Resource, for details.
Supported Tasks and Leaderboards
- Named Entity Recognition
- On PWC: Named Entity Recognition on Broad Twitter Corpus
Languages
English from UK, US, Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand; bcp47:en
Dataset Structure
Data Instances
Feature | Count |
---|---|
Documents | 9 551 |
Tokens | 165 739 |
Person entities | 5 271 |
Location entities | 3 114 |
Organization entities | 3 732 |
Data Fields
Each tweet contains an ID, a list of tokens, and a list of NER tags
id
: astring
feature.tokens
: alist
ofstrings
ner_tags
: alist
of class IDs (int
s) representing the NER class:
0: O
1: B-PER
2: I-PER
3: B-ORG
4: I-ORG
5: B-LOC
6: I-LOC
Data Splits
Section | Region | Collection period | Description | Annotators | Tweet count |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | UK | 2012.01 | General collection | Expert | 1000 |
B | UK | 2012.01-02 | Non-directed tweets | Expert | 2000 |
E | Global | 2014.07 | Related to MH17 disaster | Crowd & expert | 200 |
F | Stratified | 2009-2014 | Twitterati | Crowd & expert | 2000 |
G | Stratified | 2011-2014 | Mainstream news | Crowd & expert | 2351 |
H | Non-UK | 2014 | General collection | Crowd & expert | 2000 |
The most varied parts of the BTC are sections F and H. However, each of the remaining four sections has some specific readily-identifiable bias. So, we propose that one uses half of section H for evaluation and leaves the other half in the training data. Section H should be partitioned in the order of the JSON-format lines. Note that the CoNLL-format data is readily reconstructible from the JSON format, which is the authoritative data format from which others are derived.
Test: Section F
Development: Section H (the paper says "second half of Section H" but ordinality could be ambiguous, so it all goes in. Bonne chance)
Training: everything else
Dataset Creation
Curation Rationale
[Needs More Information]
Source Data
Initial Data Collection and Normalization
[Needs More Information]
Who are the source language producers?
[Needs More Information]
Annotations
Annotation process
[Needs More Information]
Who are the annotators?
[Needs More Information]
Personal and Sensitive Information
[Needs More Information]
Considerations for Using the Data
Social Impact of Dataset
[Needs More Information]
Discussion of Biases
[Needs More Information]
Other Known Limitations
[Needs More Information]
Additional Information
Dataset Curators
[Needs More Information]
Licensing Information
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Citation Information
@inproceedings{derczynski2016broad,
title={Broad twitter corpus: A diverse named entity recognition resource},
author={Derczynski, Leon and Bontcheva, Kalina and Roberts, Ian},
booktitle={Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers},
pages={1169--1179},
year={2016}
}
Contributions
Author-added dataset @leondz
- Downloads last month
- 91