Volume 16, Issue 1 (2-2024)                   itrc 2024, 16(1): 42-54 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Nemati S, Salehi Chegani R. An Optimized Deep Model for Bi-lingual Sentiment Analysis of Medical User Reviews. itrc 2024; 16 (1) :42-54
URL: http://journal.itrc.ac.ir/article-1-571-en.html
1- Department of Computer Engineering Shahrekord University Shahrekord, Iran , s.nemati@sku.ac.ir
2- Department of Computer Engineering Shahrekord University Shahrekord, Iran
Abstract:   (2198 Views)
—Sentiment analysis of online doctor reviews helps patients to better evaluate and select the related doctors based on the previous patients' satisfaction. Although some studies are addressing this problem in the English language, only one preliminary study has been reported for the Persian language. In this study, we propose a new evolutionary deep model for sentiment analysis of Persian online doctor reviews. The proposed method utilizes both Persian reviews and their English translations as inputs of two separate deep models. Then, the outputs of the two models are combined in a single vector which is used for deciding the sentiment polarity of the review in the last layer of the proposed deep model. To improve the performance of the system, we propose an evolutionary approach to optimize the hyperparameters of the proposed deep model. We also compared three evolutionary algorithms, namely, Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), Genetic Algorithm (GA), and Gray Wolf Optimization (GWO) algorithm, for this purpose. We evaluated the proposed model in two phases; In the first phase, we compared four deep models, namely, long shortterm memory (LSTM), convolutional neural network (CNN), a hybrid of LSTM and CNN, and a bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model with four traditional machine learning models including Naïve Bayes (NB), decision tree (DT), support vector machines (SVM), and random forest (RF). The results showed that the BiLSTM and CNN models outperform other methods, significantly. In the second phase, we compared the optimized version of two proposed bi-lingual models in which either two BiLSTM or two CNN models were used in parallel for processing Persian and English reviews. The results indicated that the optimization of the CNN using ACO and the optimization of BiLSTM using a genetic algorithm can achieve the best performance among other combinations of two deep models and three optimization algorithms. In the current study, we proposed two deep models for bi-lingual sentiment analysis of online Persian doctor reviews. Moreover, we optimized the proposed models using ACO, genetic algorithm, and gray wolf optimization methods. The results indicated that the proposed bi-lingual model outperforms a similar model using only Persian or English reviews. Also, optimizing the parameter of proposed deep models using ACO or genetic algorithms improved the performance of the models. 
Full-Text [PDF 1324 kb]   (852 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Information Technology

References
1. “How Many Websites Are There in the World?” [online] Available at: https://siteefy.com/how-many-websites-are-there/ [Accessed: 24 August 2023
2. K., Talattinis, Z. Christina, and S. George. "Ranking domain names using various rating methods", ICCGI 2014.
3. https://www.hillstonenet.com/wp-content/uploads/Hillstone_HSM4.7.0_EN_0321.pdf
4. L. H. Orans, J. D'Hoinne, and J. Chessman. "Market Guide for Network Detection and Response", 2020.
5. D. Sharma, R. Shukla, A.K. Giri and S. Kumar, "A brief review on search engine optimization." 9th international conference on cloud computing, data science & engineering, 2019.
6. V. L. Pochat, T. V. Goethem, S. Tajalizadehkhoob, M. Korczyński and W. Joosen, "Tranco: A research-oriented top sites ranking hardened against manipulation.", arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.01156, 2018.
7. D. Giomelakis and A. Veglis, "Investigating search engine optimization factors in media websites: The case of Greece." Digital journalism, pp. 379-400, 2016.
8. E. Cooper, "A guide to internationalized top-level domains." No. 178 Managing Intell. Prop., 2008.
9. P. S. Sharma, D. Yadav and R. N. Thakur, " Web Page Ranking Using Web Mining Techniques: A Comprehensive Survey", Mobile Information Systems, pp.1-19, 2022.
10. L. Rabiei, M. Mazoochi and M. Bagheri,"Web Domains Ranking with Real User Traffic Based on the Big Data Platform", International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Research, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 32-41, 2020.
11. A. Signorini, A survey of Ranking Algorithms. Department of Computer Science, University of Iowa, 2005.
12. D. K. Sharma and A Sharma, "A comparative analysis of web page ranking algorithms". International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 2670-2676, 2010.
13. A. Borodin, G. O. Roberts, J. S. Rosenthal and P. Tsaparas, "Link analysis ranking: algorithms, theory, and experiments". ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), vol.5, no.1, pp. 231-297, 2005.
14. J. M. Kleinberg, "Hubs, authorities, and communities". ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 1999.
15. L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani and T. Winograd, The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. In. Stanford InfoLab, 1999
16. J. Kline, A. Aelony, B. Carpenter and P. Barford, " Triangulated Rank-ordering of Web domains", 32nd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC 32), 2022.
17. H. Zhao, Z. Chang, W. Wang and X. Zeng, "Malicious Domain Names Detection Algorithm Based on Lexical Analysis and Feature Quantification", IEEE Access, 2019.
18. B. Altay, T. Dokeroglu, and A. Cosar, ‘‘Context-sensitive and keyword density-based supervised machine learning techniques for malicious Web-page detection,’’ Soft Comput., vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 4177–4191, Jun. 2019.
19. D. Huang, K. Xu, and J. Pei, ‘‘Malicious URL detection by dynamically mining patterns without pre-defined elements,’’ World Wide Web, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 1375–1394, Nov. 2014.
20. M. Zouina and B. Outtaj, ‘‘A novel lightweight URL phishing detection system using SVM and similarity index,’’ Human-Centric Comput. Inf. Sci., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-13, Jun. 2017.
21. S. Schiavoni, F. Maggi, L. Cavallaro, and S. Zanero, ‘‘Phoenix: DGA-based botnet tracking and intelligence,’’ in Proc. 10th GI Int. Conf. Det. Int. Malware, Vulnerability Assessment (DIMVA), pp. 192–211, 2014.
22. S. Englehardt and A. Narayanan, "Online tracking: A 1-million-site measurement and analysis", Proceedings of the ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security. 2016.
23. T. Alby and R. Jäschke, "Analyzing the Web: Are Top Websites Lists a Good Choice for Research? in Linking Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries", 26th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries, TPDL Padua, Italy, 2022
24. https://labs.ripe.net/author/samaneh_tajalizadehkhoob_1/the-tale-of-website-popularity-rankings-an-extensive-analysis/
25. https://blog.cloudflare.com/radar-domain-rankings/
26. D. Prantl and M. Prantl, "Website traffic measurement and rankings: competitive intelligence tools examination", International Journal of Web Information Systems, vol.14, no. 4, pp. 423-437, 2018.
27. J. M. Patel. "Introduction to common crawl datasets." Getting Structured Data from the Internet: Running Web Crawlers/Scrapers on a Big Data Production Scale, pp. 277-324, 2020
28. https://backlinko.com/google-ranking-factors
29. https://www.simplypsychology.org/likert-scale.html
30. G. E. Rodríguez, et al. "Cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks and mitigation: A survey." Computer Networks vol. 166, 2020.
31. K. L. Wuensch, What is a likert scale? and how do you pronounce 'likert?'. East Carolina University, 2005.
32. https://www.contentpowered.com/blog/alexa-com-dead-alternatives/
33. https://www.studocu.com/en-us/document/the-university-of-texas-health-science-center-at-houston/introduction-to-applied-health-informatics/authority-accuracy-objectivity-currency-and-coverage-evaluation-for-websites/16159240
34. https://www.profound.net/pages/resources/DomainRank_Whitepaper.pdf
35. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/237020717074.pdf?expires=1730707550&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=30F6D7F79DC356EDC3388ACE2899FBFB
36. https://www.semrush.com/kb/27-rank
37. H. Taherdoost and M. Madanchian, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts. Encyclopedia,.vol. 3, no.1, pp. 77-87, 2023.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.