Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Cross-Platform Emoji Interpretation: Analysis, a Solution, and Applications (1709.04969v1)

Published 14 Sep 2017 in cs.CL

Abstract: Most social media platforms are largely based on text, and users often write posts to describe where they are, what they are seeing, and how they are feeling. Because written text lacks the emotional cues of spoken and face-to-face dialogue, ambiguities are common in written language. This problem is exacerbated in the short, informal nature of many social media posts. To bypass this issue, a suite of special characters called "emojis," which are small pictograms, are embedded within the text. Many emojis are small depictions of facial expressions designed to help disambiguate the emotional meaning of the text. However, a new ambiguity arises in the way that emojis are rendered. Every platform (Windows, Mac, and Android, to name a few) renders emojis according to their own style. In fact, it has been shown that some emojis can be rendered so differently that they look "happy" on some platforms, and "sad" on others. In this work, we use real-world data to verify the existence of this problem. We verify that the usage of the same emoji can be significantly different across platforms, with some emojis exhibiting different sentiment polarities on different platforms. We propose a solution to identify the intended emoji based on the platform-specific nature of the emoji used by the author of a social media post. We apply our solution to sentiment analysis, a task that can benefit from the emoji calibration technique we use in this work. We conduct experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of the mapping in this task.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Fred Morstatter (64 papers)
  2. Kai Shu (88 papers)
  3. Suhang Wang (118 papers)
  4. Huan Liu (283 papers)
Citations (8)