2004), with and without preprocessing the input vectors with Principal Component Analysis (PCA; (Pearson 1901); (Hotelling 1933)).
We also varied the recognition features provided to the techniques, using both character and token n-grams.
For our experiment, we selected 600 authors for whom we were able to determine with a high degree of certainty a) that they were human individuals and b) what gender they were.
We then experimented with several author profiling techniques, namely Support Vector Regression (as provided by LIBSVM; (Chang and Lin 2011)), Linguistic Profiling (LP; (van Halteren 2004)), and Ti MBL (Daelemans et al.
For gender, the system checks the profile for about 150 common male and 150 common female first names, as well as for gender related words, such as father, mother, wife and husband.
An interesting observation is that there is a clear class of misclassified users who have a majority of opposite gender users in their social network. When adding more information sources, such as profile fields, they reach an accuracy of 92.0%.Two other machine learning systems, Linguistic Profiling and Ti MBL, come close to this result, at least when the input is first preprocessed with PCA. Introduction In the Netherlands, we have a rather unique resource in the form of the Twi NL data set: a daily updated collection that probably contains at least 30% of the Dutch public tweet production since 2011 (Tjong Kim Sang and van den Bosch 2013).However, as any collection that is harvested automatically, its usability is reduced by a lack of reliable metadata.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).