↓ Skip to main content

Automated Authorship Attribution Using Advanced Signal Classification Techniques

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Automated Authorship Attribution Using Advanced Signal Classification Techniques
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0054998
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maryam Ebrahimpour, Tālis J. Putniņš, Matthew J. Berryman, Andrew Allison, Brian W.-H. Ng, Derek Abbott

Abstract

In this paper, we develop two automated authorship attribution schemes, one based on Multiple Discriminant Analysis (MDA) and the other based on a Support Vector Machine (SVM). The classification features we exploit are based on word frequencies in the text. We adopt an approach of preprocessing each text by stripping it of all characters except a-z and space. This is in order to increase the portability of the software to different types of texts. We test the methodology on a corpus of undisputed English texts, and use leave-one-out cross validation to demonstrate classification accuracies in excess of 90%. We further test our methods on the Federalist Papers, which have a partly disputed authorship and a fair degree of scholarly consensus. And finally, we apply our methodology to the question of the authorship of the Letter to the Hebrews by comparing it against a number of original Greek texts of known authorship. These tests identify where some of the limitations lie, motivating a number of open questions for future work. An open source implementation of our methodology is freely available for use at https://github.com/matthewberryman/author-detection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 57 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 31%
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 7 11%
Lecturer 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 28 46%
Arts and Humanities 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Linguistics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 13 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,225,111
of 24,452,844 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#15,795
of 211,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,016
of 196,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#375
of 5,389 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,452,844 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 211,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 196,735 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,389 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.