8008 online dating sites who want married
For all techniques and features, we ran the same 5-fold cross-validation experiments in order to determine how well they could be used to distinguish between male and female authors of tweets.In the following sections, we first present some previous work on gender recognition (Section 2). Currently the field is getting an impulse for further development now that vast data sets of user generated data is becoming available. (2012) show that authorship recognition is also possible (to some degree) if the number of candidate authors is as high as 100,000 (as compared to the usually less than ten in traditional studies).The resource would become even more useful if we could deduce complete and correct metadata from the various available information sources, such as the provided metadata, user relations, profile photos, and the text of the tweets.
Their features were hash tags, token unigrams and psychometric measurements provided by the Linguistic Inquiry of Word Count software (LIWC; (Pennebaker et al. Although LIWC appears a very interesting addition, it hardly adds anything to the classification.2009) managed to increase the gender recognition quality to 89.2%, using sentence length, 35 non-dictionary words, and 52 slang words.The authors do not report the set of slang words, but the non-dictionary words appear to be more related to style than to content, showing that purely linguistic behaviour can contribute information for gender recognition as well.In this case, the Twitter profiles of the authors are available, but these consist of freeform text rather than fixed information fields.And, obviously, it is unknown to which degree the information that is present is true.