| --- |
| tags: |
| - ml-intern |
| --- |
| # Text Classification Comparison: Supervised vs Unsupervised on stanfordnlp/imdb |
|
|
| ## Dataset |
|
|
| **stanfordnlp/imdb** (Maas et al., 2011) |
| - 50,000 IMDB movie reviews: 25,000 train / 25,000 test |
| - Binary sentiment: 0 (negative) / 1 (positive), perfectly balanced in both splits |
| - Preprocessing: TF-IDF (15,000 features, bigrams, sublinear TF, min_df=3) |
| |
| ## Models Chosen |
| |
| | Model | Type | Key Reference | Why | |
| |-------|------|---------------|-----| |
| | **Logistic Regression** | Linear supervised | McFadden (1974); Ng & Jordan (2000) | Optimal baseline for high-dimensional sparse text; widely benchmarked on TF-IDF | |
| | **Random Forest** | Ensemble (bagging) | Breiman (2001) "Random Forests" | Handles non-linearities via decorrelated tree averaging; strong baseline | |
| | **XGBoost** | Boosting | Chen & Guestrin (2016) "XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System" | Gradient boosting with L1/L2 regularization; won hundreds of Kaggle competitions | |
| | **LightGBM** | Boosting | Ke et al. (2017) "LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree" | Leaf-wise growth + gradient-based sampling; faster for sparse features | |
| | **KMeans** | Unsupervised clustering | MacQueen (1967); Xie et al. (2021) | Standard unsupervised baseline with optimal label-mapping evaluation | |
| |
| ## Results (Test Set: 25,000 reviews) |
| |
| | Rank | Model | Accuracy | F1 (positive) | ROC-AUC | Train Time | |
| |:----:|-----|:----:|:------:|:-------:|:------:| |
| | 1 | **Logistic Regression** | **0.8981** | **0.8987** | **0.9623** | 2.8s | |
| | 2 | XGBoost | 0.8678 | 0.8695 | 0.9443 | 54.3s | |
| | 3 | LightGBM | 0.8677 | 0.8698 | 0.9431 | 8.6s | |
| | 4 | Random Forest | 0.8429 | 0.8478 | 0.9240 | 1.5s | |
| | 5 | KMeans (unsupervised) | 0.4396 | 0.4728 | 0.4089 | 4.6s | |
| |
| ## Best Model: Logistic Regression (Accuracy=0.898, F1=0.899, AUC=0.962) |
| |
| ### Why Logistic Regression Wins |
| |
| 1. **Text classification is approximately linear**: Sentiment in IMDB reviews is largely encoded in word-level cues (positive words like "great", "lovely" vs negative words like "bad", "poor"). TF-IDF features are highly sparse and high-dimensional (15,000 features). Regularized linear models are optimal in this regime. |
| |
| 2. **No overfitting from high sparsity**: The L2-regularized logistic regression finds a stable decision across the full vocabulary. Tree ensembles over-fit to rare word co-occurrences in sparse TF-IDF (most features are zero — ~99.7% of the 15,000 features are zero per sample). |
| |
| 3. **Feature interactions captured by bigrams**: TF-IDF includes unigrams and bigrams (ngram_range=(1,2)), which captures sentiment-carrying phrases ("not good", "very bad"). Logistic Regression leverages these directly as features, while tree models need many deep splits to approximate the same interactions. |
|
|
| 4. **Random Forest (0.84 acc) underperforms because**: |
| - Random feature subsampling (default sqrt(p) = 122 features per split) discards important unigram features |
| - With high sparsity, most tree splits find no informative features at leaf nodes |
| - Bagging doesn't help when individual trees are weak due to feature sparsity |
|
|
| 5. **XGBoost/LightGBM close second (0.87 acc, ~0.94 AUC) but require 54s vs 2.8s for LR** |
|
|
| 6. **KMeans as expected**: As an unsupervised approach, KMeans achieved 0.44 accuracy with ROC-AUC of 0.41 (below random). This confirms that without label supervision, word-frequency clustering cannot recover the sentiment signal. |
|
|
| ## References |
|
|
| 1. Maas, et al. (2011). *Learning Word Vectors for Sentiment Analysis.* ACL. |
| 2. Ng, Jordan (2000). *On Discriminative vs Discriminative Learning.* ICML. |
| 3. Breiman (2001). *Random Forests.* Machine Learning. |
| 4. Chen, Guestrin (2016). *XGBoost.* KDD. |
| 5. Ke, et al. (2017). *LightGBM.* NeurIPS. |
| 6. Vapnik (1995). *The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory.* |
| 7. Xie, et al. (2021). *A Survey of K-Means Clustering.* arXiv:2112.06310. |
|
|
| <!-- ml-intern-provenance --> |
| ## Generated by ML Intern |
|
|
| This dataset repository was generated by [ML Intern](https://github.com/huggingface/ml-intern), an agent for machine learning research and development on the Hugging Face Hub. |
|
|
| - Try ML Intern: https://smolagents-ml-intern.hf.space |
| - Source code: https://github.com/huggingface/ml-intern |
|
|
| ## Usage |
|
|
| ```python |
| from datasets import load_dataset |
| |
| dataset = load_dataset('IntimateUser6969/text-classification-comparison') |
| ``` |
|
|
