<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Exploiting Online Data in the Policy Making Process</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Aron Larsson</string-name>
          <email>aron@dsv.su.se</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Steve Taylor</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Timo Wandhöfer</string-name>
          <email>timo.wandhoefer@gesis.org</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Vasilis Koulolias</string-name>
          <email>vasilis@egovlab.eu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Dept. of Information and Communications Systems, Mid Sweden University</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>IT Innovation, University of Southampton</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3">
          <label>3</label>
          <institution>eGovLab, Dept. of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>This paper reports on the ambitions and methods behind the Sense4us project, aimed to provide ICT tools supporting policy making through systematic gathering of heterogeneous online data to increase problem understanding and the general public's opinions. The tools' goal is to enable stakeholders within the political sphere to identify online available data concerning their policies.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Policy making</kwd>
        <kwd>policy analysis</kwd>
        <kwd>social media</kwd>
        <kwd>semantic web</kwd>
        <kwd>open data</kwd>
        <kwd>Sense4us</kwd>
        <kwd>decision support</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Policy making is a complex activity since it involves striking a balance between legal
requirements, intended outcomes and public response to the policy. Whilst
incorporating popular input into the process is crucial to the legitimacy and acceptability of the
outcome, it is also desirable to match citizen’s expectations and demands to the policy.
Questions of great concern for policy makers then become when policy makers are
assured of that sufficient relevant issues and influences are taken into account, and to
what extent the impact of a policy can be predicted before it is implemented. This is
both in terms of the policy issue and targets themselves, i.e. will the effect of the policy
reach what is desired, as well in terms of how the policy is accepted by citizens and
stakeholders, which is important since the policy impact may be dependent on broad
acceptance, avoiding non-desired outcomes and early needs for reformulation or
abandoning the policy, cf., e.g., [8].</p>
      <p>However, much of the literature on public policy analysis deals with (ex-post)
evaluation, which tries to understand the causes and consequences of policies after they
have been implemented [17]. Ex-ante evaluations are however equally important,
carried out at the early stages of policy development and having a prescriptive bent
involving impact assessment and ranking of policy options, see [18]. In this stage, citizens
and policy makers alike wrestle with how to intelligently filter information according
to relevance, relationship and provenance. Ex-ante evaluation encompasses forecasting
Copyright © 2015 for this paper by its authors. Copying permitted for private and
academic purposes.
of consequences if policies were to be implemented and prescriptions about which
policies should be implemented. One important aim of ex-ante decision support within the
context of policy making therefore involve developing ways of facilitating for
policymakers to create policies that is consistent with their preferences while at the same time
being accepted by other stakeholders, cf. [3]. The policy making challenges then also
include sense making and trust building within the constraints of a participatory
exercise – communicating the important issues and why there are strong beliefs in a certain
policy while being aware of public opinion with respect to the issue. Decision makers
are at the same time increasingly coming under pressure to be more inclusive and
cocreate policy with stakeholders, both from technologists as well as international and
regional treaties such as the Aarhus Convention (1998). Recognising the importance of
participatory practices in the network society implies looking not only at what happens
in formal participatory practices, but also at what happens behind the scenes, in
informal practices [4]. These informal practices are not necessarily organised in invited
spaces, but are emerging spontaneously and are based on common concerns created by
the particular situation at hand [6]. This relates particularly to the use of social media
when framing policy decisions or anticipating their impact.</p>
      <p>Previous attempts on providing ICT tools supporting this task has mainly focused on
finding procedures for the incorporation of decision data obtained from decision makers
and experts. Less work has been done on the means for providing information on both
the public’s views, values, and opinions without initiating directed polls, together with
fast means for obtaining facts and knowledge about the policy issue at hand by
searching for published datasets and reports. Traditional methods for gathering opinions are
limited to polls, surveys and on-line portals, all of which are open to the biases which
arise from the framing of questions and self-selection of respondents, also coming with
the expensive need to design and adapt the means used for gathering the information.
Additional efforts must also be put on the identification of relevant datasets, the finding
of relevant reports, and understanding a complex network of stakeholders, all activities
which could be effectively facilitated by novel methods for searching on-line data. In
other words, on-line data can support basing a policy decision on both public opinion
and “evidence” on that it will be effective, increasing the likelihood of broad public
acceptance and that targets will be reached.
1.1</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Online Data</title>
      <p>Online data, i.e. data that can be accessed remotely and physically resides on a device
connected to a wide area network, range from sensor data to text, from social media to
expert repositories of knowledge. A vast ocean of heterogeneous information available
online emerges, however sifting through this ocean and finding the data relevant for a
policy issue at hand seems a task too difficult to overcome. A matter of great concern
for contemporary technological development in the e-government domain is to what
extent this difficulty can be remedied by systematic methods implemented in web tools,
simple enough to be used for policy makers and analysts when they enter a new policy
issue? As one contribution to this area, the Sense4us project is developing search tools
to help find and present relevant sources of information and is building social media
analytics tools to discover and track what people are talking about that is relevant to the
topic of interest.</p>
      <p>Of significance, the project is devoted to develop a software modelling tool that
helps policy makers to assemble the information they have discovered and link it
together. This enables the influences and impacts of policy to be investigated, and its
likely outcomes identified. The ambition is therefore to provide aid to policy makers in
their struggle to discover knowledge and opinions about the policy issue at hand, and
this in turn helps them to capture perspectives that they would not normally be aware
of or taken into account in the policy formulation stage of the policy making cycle. See
[9] for a comprehensive treatment of this cycle.
2</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>The Toolkit</title>
        <p>The toolkit revolves around online annotated data enabling for thematic searches
using keywords and/or so-called hashtags. Two such data sources are in focus, namely
social media data, currently focusing on Twitter feeds, and linked open data, i.e. data
or datasets that are open and linked semantically, thereby the name of “semantic web”
is often used when referring to linked open data.
2.1</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Social media´</title>
      <p>Recognising if a policy is well or badly received by the citizens, what elements of
the policy are more controversial, and who are the citizens discussing about that policy
are key factors to support policy makers in understanding, not only the citizen’s
opinions about a policy, but also up to which level the social media dialogs represent public
opinion and should be used to inform the policy making process.</p>
      <p>Following this purpose, the research and development of accurate sentiment analysis
tools is at the core of the Sense4us project. We have investigated the use of contextual
and conceptual semantics from Twitter posts for calculating sentiment [12] [13] [14].
This involved running a comparison of the two types of semantics with respect to their
impact on sentiment analysis accuracy.</p>
      <p>Results showed that using conceptual semantics (gleaned from term co-occurrence)
improves sentiment accuracy over several baselines. Results also showed that adding
conceptual semantics (entities extracted using AlchemyAPI) enhances this accuracy
even further.</p>
      <p>Accuracy is key in the context of Sense4us since the project aims to provide trustable
information in which policy makers can support their decisions. Following this goal we
also studied the role of stop words on sentiment analysis [11], showing that best results
are achieved when using automatically generated dataset-specific set of stop words.
Furthermore, we experimented with a new approach to automatically extend sentiment
lexicons to render them more adaptable to domain change on social media, and
generated and published a new gold-standard dataset for social media sentiment analysis
[10].
2.2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Linked open data</title>
      <p>The amount of semantic data published on the Web has increased considerably in
the last years. One of the most remarkable efforts is the Linking Open Data community
project1, which developed several tools and defined best practises for various steps of
the semantic data lifecycle. More specifically, the project focused on creating,
integrating, publishing, documenting, and validating so-called Linked Data (i.e. data that
follows the Linked Data principles). As a result, the “Linked Open Data cloud” was
created. The LOD cloud is a set of RDF2 datasets interlinked with each other, containing
as of August 2014 datasets about several topical domains such as media, life sciences,
government, publications, linguistic resources and social networking.</p>
      <p>A central task of the project in the future is the improved accessibility of the Linked
Open Data cloud for policy makers as well as project partners. The two major elements
here are the ranking of available data sets within the Linked Open Data cloud, in regard
to given queries. Both elements support policy makers to gain deeper insight in topics
as well as providing them with additional information about related fields and possible
effects of a policy.</p>
      <p>The following Error! Reference source not found. displays the conceptual view
how the “Policy Maker” benefits from published linked open data. The policy maker
(see left) interacts with the Sense4us user interface (see green box in the background
called “User Interface”). He has two options for retrieving the Linked Open Data Cloud.
The outcome of both retrieval strategies is a ranked list of data sets in terms of relevance
for the policy theme.
1 http://www.w3.org/wiki/SweoIG/TaskForces/CommunityProjects/LinkingOpenData,
2 Resource Description Framework, a web standard for data interchange.</p>
      <p>Problem structuring are concerned with facilitating policy evaluation, i) to measure
the effects of a policy, or impact assessment, ii) to understand why the effects are to be,
and iii) to facilitate learning about the policy issue at hand, cf, e.g., [16]. The
prescriptive impact assessment is a challenge, where the effects of a policy are often delayed in
time as well as characterized by multiple perspectives, conflicting interests, or
uncertainties. To answer these challenges, problem structuring methods have emerged, aimed
at facilitating to obtain a better understanding of unstructured problems. The methods
rely heavily on engaging with policy makers, adopting a facilitative mode of
engagement, and simple, often qualitative models [7].</p>
      <p>Providing an ICT tool for problem structuring tailored for modelling of public policy
problems involving entities such as policy instruments, goals and targets, and actors,
where there is an underlying causal map representation of how changes in instruments
lead to change in goal variables. See [1] for a detailed presentation of causal maps. It is
possible to simulate policy consequences and possible future scenarios on the causal
map by quantifying elements of the map (variables and change transfer coefficients).
Further, scenarios, or alternative policy options based on a forward-looking impact
assessment in terms of economic, social, environmental and other impacts can be
generated and decision evaluation of the generated options can be done with decision analysis
methods.</p>
      <p>Scenario generation helps policy-makers in identifying feasible options from a
possibly vast space of possible ones reaching stipulated targets, while the decision
evaluation can supports an in-depth performance evaluation of policy proposals taking the
preferences of actors into account. The aim is to provide a policy-oriented software
solution that implements a systems approach to structure a public policy problem
situation and simulate the system behaviour and responses to interventions over time using
a dynamic simulation model, in order to design policy options and assess the
consequences given a number of alternative possible futures. Finally, model building also
requires access to large amounts of information and means for identifying the elements
of the problem model, which is often a constraint for modelling activities. In this
respect, it is of high concern to investigate the interface between fast web based means
for gathering and filtering policy relevant information, such as linked open data
searches and sentiment analysis, in order to facilitate efficient use of a problem
structuring tool.</p>
      <p>Fig. 2. Problem structuring with causal maps.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>The Sense4us Platform as an Integrated Toolkit</title>
        <p>The toolkit is an integrated framework that enables the user to use information
gathering and analysis tools to address the informational challenges described above. The
tools are in the following areas.</p>
        <p>• A text summarisation tool enables the user to find major key words or
phrases in documents or other bodies of texts (such as a document or
collection of social media postings). The tool uses the well-established Latent
Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) technique described by Blei et al. [2] and
applied to social media in [15]. The benefit to the user is that they can
determine the key themes of the texts without reading them, enabling them to
prioritize which texts should be read first.
• Finding related information – given a key word or phrase, this tool enables
the user to find information around the key word’s theme in open data or
social media, and how the information is related. We are currently
investigating automated searches of DBpedia3 (which is a semantically annotated
version of Wikipedia). The user specifies a Wikipedia page, and the result
of the search is a map of links of different types in and out the page. The
benefit to the user is that they are able to find previously unknown
information around their policy area of interest, thus increasing their body of
knowledge about the policy area.
• Opinion analysis [5] [10] enables the user to discover what peoples’
opinions towards the topic of interest on social media. Given a body of social
media postings, the tool can indicate the overall sentiment towards key
words of interest to the user.
• Policy modelling and simulation [1] enables the user to create a model of
their policy (using the other tools to provide information for the model).
This model takes the form of a desired outcome and some policy options
that may achieve that outcome. The options may be evaluated via
simulation using group decision and negotiation analysis techniques to examine
the impact of the policy option on the desired outcome and different classes
of citizen (in effect who wins and who loses).</p>
        <p>Each tool can be used as and when the user needs it, and some tools’ output
may also be used as the input for another tool, enabling the user to gain deeper insight
by additional analysis on data. The overall system architecture is shown in Error!
Reference source not found..</p>
        <sec id="sec-4-1-1">
          <title>3 http://wiki.dbpedia.org/</title>
          <p>Admin
User</p>
          <p>File
Insights</p>
          <p>Project
Provenance</p>
          <p>Sources
Data</p>
          <p>User
Interface</p>
          <p>Database</p>
          <p>Services
Configuration</p>
          <p>User
Project</p>
          <p>File</p>
          <p>Tool Wrappers</p>
          <p>Text
Summarisation
Social Media</p>
          <p>Analysis
Social Media</p>
          <p>Search
Linked Open
Data Search</p>
          <p>Tool Libraries</p>
          <p>LDA
Sentiment
Analysis
Twitter
Search
DBPedia
Search</p>
          <p>The system uses the Spring Framework4, an application framework for hosting Java
applications. This utilises a “model-view-controller” approach, which separates the
data model from the management logic and the presentation layer. This was chosen to
allow a significant amount of flexibility in how the toolkit is controlled by the user and
how the results are presented. The presentation layer is named “controllers”, and these
are responsible for displaying results and acquiring control input from users.
Management logic is represented by “services”, which contain control logic and processing
beyond the capability of controllers.</p>
          <p>All data input into the system or output from tools is stored in a database,
together with provenance information, which includes a description of the data source,
the time and date the data was processed (collected or transformed by a tool), and which
user owns the data. The database is MongoDB5, a so-called “NoSQL” database, chosen
for its flexibility in storing semi-structured data such as JSON, which is the output of
many of the data sources and tools in the toolkit.</p>
          <p>In order to enable tools to be added as necessary, each tool is interfaced to the
rest of the system by wrappers, and examples are shown in Error! Reference source
not found.. The wrappers perform functions such as fetching input data from the
database, preparing it for the tool (e.g. formatting as necessary), running the tool and storing
the output into the database with associated provenance information. A new tool can be
added to the toolkit by creating a new wrapper for it. In practice, this often means
making a copy of the closest existing wrapper, and modifying the copy as necessary to
create a new wrapper.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-1-2">
          <title>4 https://spring.io/ 55 https://www.mongodb.org/</title>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Summary</title>
        <p>In this paper we presented information and communication technologies that are part
of the research project Sense4us. Concerning the research regarding the semantics from
Twitter posts we have investigated the use of contextual and conceptual semantics for
calculating sentiment. Results showed that using conceptual semantics (e.g. gleaned
from term co-occurrence or entities extraction using AlchemyAPI) the sentiment
accuracy could be increased over several baselines. Regarding the conceptual semantics we
looked at stop words where the best results are achieved when using automatically
generated dataset-specific set of stop words. Furthermore, we experimented with a new
approach to automatically extend sentiment lexicons to render them more adaptable to
domain change on social media, and generated and published a new gold-standard
dataset for social media sentiment analysis.</p>
        <p>With respect to linked open data, since open data is provided in a variety of different
portals, interfaces and formats on the web, we must advise data publishers of particular
data sets how they can transform and publish their originally non-RDF open data in
RDF format. When facing vocabulary design of data that is to be transformed, best
practices of the Linked Data community should be followed like the reuse of existing
vocabularies as much as possible. Additionally, an extensive data publication in RDF
allows for detecting more suitable entities for the interlinking process.</p>
        <p>The proposed policy modelling and simulation approach allows simplifying and
summarising the decision maker’s knowledge, notions, and causal beliefs, as well as
information gathered from different sources about a social, socioeconomic or
sociotechnical system.
9.
10.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Acar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Druckenmiller</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          :
          <article-title>Endowing cognitive mapping with computational properties for strategic analysis</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Futures</source>
          <volume>38</volume>
          :
          <fpage>993</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1009</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Blei</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Andrew Y. Ng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Michael I. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2003</year>
          :
          <article-title>Latent dirichlet allocation</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Journal of Machine Learning Research</source>
          <volume>3</volume>
          :
          <fpage>993</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1022</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bryson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <year>2007</year>
          .
          <article-title>What to do when stakeholders matter</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Public Management Review</source>
          <volume>6</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>21</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>53</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cornwall</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2002</year>
          :
          <article-title>Making spaces, changing places: Situating participation in development</article-title>
          .
          <source>Institution of Development Studies, IDS Working Paper</source>
          <volume>170</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fernandez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wandöfer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Allen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.; Elisabeth</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          :
          <article-title>Using Social Media To Inform Policy Making: To whom are we listening?</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the European Conference on Social Media (ECSM)</source>
          .
          <source>UK.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fung</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          : Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance,
          <source>Public Administration Review</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>66</volume>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>66</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>75</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Franco</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Montibeller</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Facilitated modelling in operational research</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>European Journal of Operational Research</source>
          <volume>205</volume>
          :
          <fpage>489</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>500</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Haggett</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          :
          <article-title>Understanding public responses to offshore wind power</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Energy Policy</source>
          <volume>39</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>503</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>510</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lindblom</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>1968</year>
          :
          <string-name>
            <given-names>The</given-names>
            <surname>Policy-making Process</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJ.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saif</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Fernandez,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Alani</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>H.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2013</year>
          :
          <article-title>Evaluation datasets for twitter sentiment analysis a survey and a new dataset, the sts-gold</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings, 1st Workshop</source>
          on Emotion and
          <article-title>Sentiment in Social and Expressive Media (ESSEM) in conjunction with AI*IA Conference</article-title>
          , Turin, Italy,
          <year>2013</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saif</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Fernandez,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Alani</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>H.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , 2014a:
          <article-title>On Stopwords, Filtering and Data Sparsity for Sentiment Analysis of Twitter</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. 9th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC)</source>
          , Reykjavik, Iceland,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saif</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Fernandez,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Alani</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>H.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>2014b: SentiCircles for Contextual and Conceptual Semantic Sentiment analysis of Twitter</article-title>
          .
          <source>Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC)</source>
          ,
          <year>Crete</year>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saif</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Fernandez,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Alani</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>H.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>2014c: Adapting Sentiment Lexicons using Contextual Semantics for Twitter Sentiment Analysis</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>In Proceeding of the first semantic sentiment analysis workshop: conjunction with the eleventh Extended Semantic Web conference (ESWC)</article-title>
          . Crete, Greece.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saif</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Fernandez,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Alani</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>H.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>2014d: Semantic Patterns for Sentiment Analysis of Twitter, The 13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC)</source>
          ,
          <source>Riva del Garda - Trentino Italy.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sizov</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <year>2010</year>
          ;
          <article-title>Geofolk: Latent spatial semantics in web 2.0 social media</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. ACM.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Solliec-Berriet</surname>
            , M; Labarthe,
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Laurent,
          <string-name>
            <surname>C</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          :
          <article-title>Goals of evaluation and types of evidence</article-title>
          .
          <source>Evaluation</source>
          ,
          <volume>20</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>195</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>213</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tsoukiàs</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Montibeller</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lucertini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Belton</surname>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <year>2013</year>
          .
          <article-title>Policy analytics: an agenda for research and practice</article-title>
          ,
          <source>EURO Journal of Decision Processes</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          :
          <fpage>115</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>134</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Turnpenny</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Radaelli,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C. M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Jordan</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Jacob</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>K.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>2009</year>
          .
          <article-title>The policy and politics of policy appraisal: emerging trends and new directions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of European Public Policy</source>
          <volume>16</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>640</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>653</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>