In this paper we restrict ourselves to gender recognition, and it is also this aspect we will discuss further in this section.
A group which is very active in studying gender recognition (among other traits) on the basis of text is that around Moshe Koppel. 2002) they report gender recognition on formal written texts taken from the British National Corpus (and also give a good overview of previous work), reaching about 80% correct attributions using function words and parts of speech.
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.
Their highest score when using just text features was 75.5%, testing on all the tweets by each author (with a train set of 3.3 million tweets and a test set of about 418,000 tweets). (2012) used SVMlight to classify gender on Nigerian twitter accounts, with tweets in English, with a minimum of 50 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.
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.
Another system that predicts the gender for Dutch Twitter users is Tweet Genie ( that one can provide with a Twitter user name, after which the gender and age are estimated, based on the user s last 200 tweets.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.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.