<!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>TAG-it @ EVALITA2020: Overview of the Topic, Age, and Gender Prediction Task for Italian</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Andrea Cimino Felice Dell'Orletta ItaliaNLP Lab</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>ILC-CNR ItaliaNLP Lab</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>ILC-CNR Pisa</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Italy Pisa</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Malvina Nissim Faculty of Arts - CLCG University of Groningen</institution>
          ,
          <country country="NL">The Netherlands</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The Topic, Age, and Gender (TAG-it) prediction task in Italian was organised in the context of EVALITA 2020, using forum posts as textual evidence for profiling their authors. The task was articulated in two separate subtasks: one where all three dimensions (topic, gender, age) were to be predicted at once; the other where training and test sets were drawn from different forum topics and gender or age had to be predicted separately. Teams tackled the problems both with classical machine learning methods as well as neural models. Using the training-data to fine-tuning a BERT-based monolingual model for Italian proved eventually as the most successful strategy in both subtasks. We observe that topic and gender are easier to predict than age. The higher results for gender obtained in this shared task with respect to a comparable challenge at EVALITA 2018 might be due to the larger evidence per author provided at this edition, as well as to the availability of pre-trained large models for fine-tuning, which have shown improvement on very many NLP tasks.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Author profiling is the task of automatically
discovering latent user attributes from text, among
which gender, age, and personality
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12 ref2 ref22 ref23 ref3 ref6">(Rao et al.,
2010; Burger et al., 2011; Schwartz et al., 2013;
Bamman et al., 2014; Flekova et al., 2016; Basile
et al., 2017)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>Copyright © 2020 for this paper by its authors. Use
permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0
International (CC BY 4.0).</p>
      <p>
        Past work in Natural Language Processing
has contributed to advancing this task especially
through the creation of resources, also in
languages other than English
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20 ref21 ref25">(Verhoeven et al., 2016;
Rangel et al., 2017, e.g.,)</xref>
        , for training supervised
models. Across the years, especially thanks to the
organisation of shared tasks in the context of the
PAN Labs, it has become evident that models that
exploit lexical information, mostly in the form of
word and character n-grams, make successful
predictions
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21 ref4 ref9">(Rangel et al., 2017; Basile et al., 2018;
Daelemans et al., 2019)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        However, cross-genre experiments
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref15 ref20 ref3 ref7 ref8">(Rangel et
al., 2016; Busger op Vollenbroek et al., 2016;
Medvedeva et al., 2017; Dell’Orletta and
Nissim, 2018)</xref>
        have revealed that most successful
approaches, exactly because they are based on
lexical clues, tend to model what rather than how
people write, capturing topic instead of style. As a
consequence, they lack portability to new genres
and more in general just new datasets.
      </p>
      <p>
        The present work aims at shedding some more
light in this direction, and at the same time
increase resources and visibility for author profiling
in Italian. We propose a shared task in the context
of EVALITA 2020
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">(Basile et al., 2020)</xref>
        that can
be broadly conceived as stemming from a
previous challenge on profiling in Italian, i.e., GxG, a
cross-genre gender prediction task. The new task
is TAG-it (Topic, Age, and Gender prediction in
Italian). With TAG-it, we introduce three main
modifications with respect to GxG. One is that
age is added to gender in the author profiling task.
Another one is that, in one of the tasks, we
conflate author and text profiling, requiring systems
to simultaneously predict author traits and topic.
Lastly, we restrict the task to in-genre modelling,
but we explicitly control for topic through two
specific subtasks.
2
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Task</title>
      <p>
        TAG-it (Topic, Age and Gender prediction for
Italian) is a profiling task for Italian. This
can be broadly seen as a follow-up of the GxG
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref8">(Dell’Orletta and Nissim, 2018)</xref>
        task organised
in the context of EVALITA 2018
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">(Caselli et al.,
2018)</xref>
        , though with some differences.
      </p>
      <p>GxG was concerned with gender prediction
only, and had two distinctive traits: (i) models
were trained and tested cross-genre, and (ii)
evidence per author was for some genres (Twitter
and YouTube) extremely limited (one tweet or one
comment). The combination of these two aspects
yielded scores that were comparatively lower than
those observed in other campaigns, and for other
languages. A core reason for the cross-genre
setting was to remove as much as possible
genrespecific traits, but also topic-related features. The
two would basically coincide in most
n-grambased models, which are standard for this task.</p>
      <p>In TAG-it, the task is revised addressing these
two aspects, for a better disentanglement of the
dimensions. First, only a single genre is
considered (forum posts). Second, longer texts are used,
which should provide better evidence than single
tweets, and are more coherent than just the
concatenation of more tweets. Third, “topic control”
is introduced in order to assess the impact on
performance of the interaction of topic and author’s
traits, in a more direct way than in GxG (where it
was done indirectly via cross-genre prediction).</p>
      <p>Data was collected accordingly, including
information regarding topic and two profiling
dimensions: gender and age. The interesting aspect of
this is that we mix text profiling and author
profiling, with tasks and analysis that treat their
modelling both at once as well as separately. In
practice, we devise and propose two tasks.</p>
      <p>
        Task 1: Predict all dimensions at once Given a
collection of texts (forum posts) the gender and the
age of the author must be predicted, together with
the topic the posts are about. The task is cast as a
multi-label classification task, with gender
represented as F (female) or M (male), age as five
different age bins, as it has been done in past profiling
tasks involving age
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">(Rangel et al., 2015, e.g.,)</xref>
        , and
topic as 14 class values.
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Task 2: Predict age and gender with topic con</title>
        <p>trol For posts coming from a small selection of
topics not represented in the training data,
systems have to predict either gender (Task 2a) or age
(Task 2b).</p>
        <p>For both tasks, participants were also free to
use external resources as they wish, provided the
cross-topic settings would be preserved, and that
everything used would be described in detail.
In order to generate the data for the tasks, we
exploited a corpus collected by Maslennikova et al.
(2019). This corpus consists of 2.5 million posts
scraped from the ForumFree platform. The posts
are written by 7.023 different users in 162
different forums. Information about the authors’ gender
and age is available.</p>
        <p>In order to have enough data for the topic
classification task, we decided to aggregate data from
several forums into a single topic. For example,
data from the forums 500x and a1audiclub where
manually classified into the AUTO-MOTO topic,
while the forums bellicapelli and
farmacieonlinesicure in the MEDICINE-AESTHETICS topic.
At the end of the aggregation process, we obtained
31 different topics. The selection of the topics that
we use in TAG-it is shown in Table 1.</p>
        <p>For age classification, we bin age into 5 age
groups: (0,19), (20, 29), (30, 39), (40, 49) and
(50100). In addition, we performed a final selection
of users in order to have sufficient evidence per
author. More precisely, we selected only the users
that wrote at least 500 tokens across their posts.
The first 500 tokens of their posts were used as
textual data while the other posts from the same users
were discarded. At the end of this process, we
obtained posts belonging to 2,458 unique users.
Table 1 reports some corpus statistics, already
arranged according to the experimental splits that we
used in the different tasks (see Section 3.2).
The data obtained from the process described in
the previous subsection was used to generate the
training and test data. The training data is the
same for Task 1 and Task 2. It contains a
variety of topics, and we aimed at a good label
distribution for both gender and age, though the forum
https://www.forumfree.it/?wiki=About
0-19
20-29</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Training data for all tasks</title>
        <sec id="sec-2-2-1">
          <title>ANIME</title>
          <p>MEDICINE-AESTHETICS
AUTO-MOTO
SPORTS
SMOKE
METAL-DETECTING
CELEBRITIES
ENTERTAINMENT
TECHNOLOGY
NATURE
BIKES</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-2-2-2">
          <title>ANIME</title>
          <p>MEDICINE-AESTHETICS
AUTO-MOTO
SPORTS
SMOKE
METAL-DETECTING
CELEBRITIES
ENTERTAINMENT
TECHNOLOGY
NATURE
BIKES</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-2-2-3">
          <title>GAMES ROLE-GAMES</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-2-2-4">
          <title>CLOCKS</title>
          <p>GAMES
ROLE-GAMES
data is overall rather unbalanced for these two
dimensions. In the selection of test data, we had to
differentiate between the two task since for Task 1
test topics should correspond to those in training,
while they should differ for Task 2.</p>
          <p>For Task 1, each topic was split into 70% for
training and 30% for test. For Task 2, we picked
posts from topics not present in the training data,
and more specifically used the forums CLOCKS,
GAMES, and ROLE-GAMES for Task 2a, and
only GAMES and ROLE-GAMES for Task 2b in
order to ensure more balanced data. Table 2 shows
the size of the datasets in terms of tokens.</p>
          <p>The data was distributed as simil-XML. The
format can be seen in Figure 1. The test data was
released blind to the participants who were given
a week to return their prediction to the organisers.
4</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Evaluation</title>
      <p>System evaluation was performed using both
standard (accuracy, precision, recall, and f-score), as
well as ad hoc measures.</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Training for all Tasks</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Test Task1 Test Task2a Test Task2b</title>
        <p>533,195
114,723</p>
        <p>For Task 1, the performance of each system
was evaluated according to two different
measures, which yielded two different rankings. In
the first ranking we use a partial scoring scheme
(Metric 1), which assigns 1/3 to each dimension
correctly predicted. Therefore, if no dimension is
predicted correctly, the system is scored with 0, if
one dimension is predicted correctly the score is
1/3, if two dimensions are correct the score is 2/3,
and if all of age, gender, and topic are correctly
assigned, then the score for the given instance is 1.</p>
        <p>In the second ranking (Metric 2), 1 point is
assigned if all the dimensions are predicted correctly
simultaneously, 0 otherwise. This corresponds to
the number of ‘1’ points assigned in Metric 1.</p>
        <p>For each ranking, the final score is the sum of
the points achieved by the system across all the
test instances, normalized by the total number of
instances in the test set.</p>
        <p>
          For Task 2, the standard micro-average f-score
was be used as scoring function. For carrying out
further analysis, we also report macro-f.
Baselines For all tasks, we introduced two
baselines. One is a data-based majority baseline,
which assign the most frequent label in the
training data to all test instances. The other one is an
SVM-based model (SVM baseline hereafter), as
SVMs are known to perform well in profiling tasks
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4 ref9">(Basile et al., 2018; Daelemans et al., 2019)</xref>
          .
        </p>
        <p>
          This classifier is implemented using
scikitlearn’s LinearSVC
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">(Pedregosa et al., 2011)</xref>
          with
default parameters, using as features up to 5-grams
of characters and up to 3-grams of words
(frequency counts).
5
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Participants</title>
      <p>Following a call for interest, 24 teams registered
for the task and thus obtained the training data.
Eventually, three teams submitted their
predictions, for a total of 20 runs. Three different runs
were allowed per task. A summary of participants
is provided in Table 3.</p>
      <p>
        Overall, participants experimented with more
classical machine learning approaches as well as
with neural networks, with some of them
employing language model based neural networks
models such as multilingual BERT
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">(Devlin et al.,
2019)</xref>
        and UmBERTo. While the UO4to team
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1 ref13 ref16">(Artigas Herold and Castro Castro, 2020)</xref>
        proposed a classical feature engineered ensamble
approach, UOBIT
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">(Labadie et al., 2020)</xref>
        and
Italhttps://github.com/
musixmatchresearch/umberto
iaNLP
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">(Occhipinti et al., 2020)</xref>
        experimented
different deep learning techniques. UOBIT proposed
a novel approach based on a combination of
different learning components, aimed at capturing
different level of information, while ItaliaNLP
experimented with both SVM and Single and Multi
task learning settings using a state-of-the-art
language model specifically tailored for the Italian
language.
      </p>
      <p>Even if allowed, the use of external resources
was not explored most probably due to great
performances already provided by the latest deep
learning language models w.r.t featured
engineered models.</p>
      <p>The following paragraphs provide a summary of
each team’s approach for ease of reference.
UOBIT tested a deep learning architecture with
4 components aimed at capturing different
information from documents. More precisely, they
extracted information from the layers of a
finedtuned multilingual version of BERT (T), used
information from a LSTM trained with FastText
input vectors (RNN-W), they added raw features
for stylistic feature extraction (STY) and finally
they extracted information from a sentence
encoder (RNN-S). The information from all the four
components is finally concatenated and fed into a
dense layer.</p>
      <p>
        UO4to participated to Task 1 with two different
ensemble classifiers, using Random Forest,
Nearest Centroid and OneVsOneClassfier learning
algorithms provided by the scikit-learn library
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">(Pedregosa et al., 2011)</xref>
        . They used n-grams of
characters using term frequency or TF-IDF depending
on the used configuration.
      </p>
      <p>
        ItaliaNLP tested three different systems. The
first one is based on three different SVM models
(one for each dimension to be predicted), using
character n-grams, word n-grams, Part-Of-Speech
n-grams and bleached
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">(van der Goot et al., 2018)</xref>
        tokens. The second one is based on three
different BERT-based classifier using UmBERTo as a
pre-trained language model, modelling each task
separately. Finally, they tested a multi–task
learning approach to jointly learn the three tasks, again
using UmBERTo as a language model.
6
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Results and Analysis</title>
      <p>
        and Task 2 respectively, using the official
evaluation metrics. For all tasks, the ItaliaNLP
system achieves the best scores. Before delving into
the specifics of each task, and into a deeper
analysis of the results, we want to make a general
observation regarding approaches. SVMs have
longed proved to be successful at profiling, and
this trend emerged also at the last edition of the
PAN shared task on author profiling
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">(Daelemans
et al., 2019)</xref>
        . In our tasks, we also observe that the
SVM baseline that we have trained for comparison
is competitive. However, the submitted model that
achieves best results is neural.
      </p>
      <p>Task 1 The best ItaliaNLP model achieves the
scores of 0.735 for Metric 1 and 0.331 for
Metric 2, which accounts for correctly predicted
instances according to all dimensions at once. The
other systems’ performance is quite a bit lower.
For Metric 1 UOBIT’s best system still performs
above all baselines, while UO4to only above
majority baseline. Also according to Metric 2, UO4to
performs above majority baseline but not better
than the SVM.</p>
      <p>For a deeper understanding of the results in
Task 1, we look at the separate performance on the
various dimensions, including both micro-F and
macro-F scores, as label distribution is not
balanced (Table 5).</p>
      <p>What clearly emerges from the table is that
classification of gender and topic is much easier than
classification of age. This seems to suggest that
textual cues are more indicative of these
dimensions than age. Gap between best submitted
(neural) model and SVM is way wider for topic and
gender than for age.</p>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>Team Name-MODEL</title>
        <sec id="sec-5-1-1">
          <title>Majority baseline</title>
          <p>SVM baseline</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-5-1-2">
          <title>UOBIT-(RNN-W T STY)</title>
          <p>UOBIT-(RNN-S T STY)
UOBIT-(RNN-W RNN-S T STY)
UO4to-ENSAMBLE-1
UO4to-ENSAMBLE-2
ItaliaNLP-STL-SVM
ItaliaNLP-MTL-UmBERTo
ItaliaNLP-STL-UmBERTo
Topic
Gender
0.766
0.832
Task 2 As for Task 1, the best system is a neural
model submitted by ItaliaNLP, both for Task 2a
(gender) and Task 2b (age). All of the models
perform above majority baseline, in spite of this
task being potentially more complex since train
and test data are drawn from different topics. As
observed before, the gap between models and both
baselines is higher for gender than for age. In
addition to the previous observation that textual clues
could be more indicative of gender than age, this
lower performance could also be due to the fact
that gender prediction is cast as a binary task while
age is cast as a multiclass problem, turning a
continuous scale into separate age bins.</p>
          <p>In-depth Analysis Although official results are
provided as micro-F score, we also report
macroF since classes are unbalanced and it is important
to assess the systems’ ability to discriminate well
both classes. In gender prediction (Task 2a),
comparing macro and micro F-scores, we observe that
the gap between the two metrics is much lower
for the neural models than for the SVMs (both
our baseline as well as the system submitted by
ItaliaNLP). This suggests that neural models are
better able to detect correct cases of both classes,
rather than majority class only.</p>
          <p>We can also observe that in both tasks, results
for age are not only globally lower than for
gender, but also closer to one another across the
submissions. We therefore zoom in on the age
prediction task by comparing the confusion matrices of
our SVM baseline and the best ItaliaNLP model,
both in Task 1 (just the age prediction part) and in
Task 2b. These are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3
respectively.</p>
          <p>What can be observed right away is that errors
are not random, rather they are more condensed in
classes closer to each other, underlining the
ability of the systems. This is particularly true for
the neural model (left in the Figures), where we
can see the most confounded classes are the
closest ones, thus generating a more uniform darker
cluster along the diagonal.</p>
          <p>Comparison to GxG As mentioned, TAG-it
could be seen as a continuation of the GxG task
at EVALITA 2018. In the latter, teams were asked
to predict gender within and across five different
genres. In TAG-it, in terms of profiling, we add
age, which we cannot obviously compare to
performances in GxG, and we use one genre only
(forum posts), but implement a cross-topic setting.</p>
          <p>We observe that results at TAG-it for gender
prediction are higher than in GxG both within
and cross-domain. We believe these are
ascribable mainly to two relevant differences between
the two tasks: (i) in this editions authors were
represented by multiple texts, while in GxG, for some
domains, evidence per author was minimal, and
(ii) texts in TAG-it are probably less noisy, at least
in comparison to some of the GxG genres (e.g.,
tweets and YouTube comments). Lastly,
methods evolve fast, and since GxG was run in 2018,
the use of Transformer-based models was not as
spread as today. It would thus be interesting to
assess the impact of fine-tuning large pre-trained
models (as it’s done in the best model at TAG-it)
to gain further improvements in gender prediction.</p>
          <p>
            One aspect that seems relevant in this respect is
the appropriateness of the pre-trained model. Both
ItaliaNLP and UOBIT used fine-tuned pre-trained
models. However, while the latter used
multilingual BERT as base, the former used the
monolingual UmBERTo, obtaining higher results. This
suggests, as it has been recently shown for a
variety of tasks
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">(Nozza et al., 2020)</xref>
            , that monolingual
models are a better choice for language-specific
downstream tasks.
          </p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Maria</given-names>
            <surname>Fernanda Artigas</surname>
          </string-name>
          Herold and Daniel Castro Castro.
          <year>2020</year>
          . TAG-it
          <year>2020</year>
          :
          <article-title>Ensemble of Machine Learning Methods</article-title>
          . In Valerio Basile, Danilo Croce, Maria Di Maro, and Lucia C. Passaro, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of Seventh Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          ),
          <article-title>Online</article-title>
          . CEUR.org.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>David</given-names>
            <surname>Bamman</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Jacob</given-names>
            <surname>Eisenstein</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Tyler</given-names>
            <surname>Schnoebelen</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2014</year>
          .
          <article-title>Gender identity and lexical variation in social media</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Sociolinguistics</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>135</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>160</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Angelo</given-names>
            <surname>Basile</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Gareth Dwyer, Maria Medvedeva, Josine Rawee, Hessel Haagsma, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Malvina</given-names>
            <surname>Nissim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>N-GrAM: New Groningen Author-profiling Model</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the CLEF 2017 Evaluation Labs and Workshop - Working Notes Papers</source>
          ,
          <volume>11</volume>
          -
          <fpage>14</fpage>
          September, Dublin, Ireland.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Angelo</given-names>
            <surname>Basile</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Gareth Dwyer, Maria Medvedeva, Josine Rawee, Hessel Haagsma, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Malvina</given-names>
            <surname>Nissim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>Simply the best: minimalist system trumps complex models in author profiling</article-title>
          .
          <source>In International Conference of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>143</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>156</lpage>
          . Springer.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Valerio</given-names>
            <surname>Basile</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Danilo Croce, Maria Di Maro, and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lucia</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Passaro</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2020</year>
          .
          <article-title>Evalita 2020: Overview of the 7th evaluation campaign of natural language processing and speech tools for italian</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Valerio Basile</source>
          , Danilo Croce, Maria Di Maro, and Lucia C. Passaro, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of Seventh Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          ),
          <article-title>Online</article-title>
          . CEUR.org.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>John D. Burger</surname>
            , John Henderson, George Kim, and
            <given-names>Guido</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zarrella</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2011</year>
          .
          <article-title>Discriminating Gender on Twitter</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>1301</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1309</lpage>
          , Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>July</surname>
          </string-name>
          . Association for Computational Linguistics.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Mart</given-names>
            <surname>Busger op Vollenbroek</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Talvany Carlotto, Tim Kreutz, Maria Medvedeva, Chris Pool, Johannes Bjerva, Hessel Haagsma, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Malvina</given-names>
            <surname>Nissim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>GronUP: Groningen user profiling notebook for PAN at CLEF</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>In CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs</article-title>
          and Workshop: Working Notes Papers.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Tommaso</given-names>
            <surname>Caselli</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Nicole Novielli, Viviana Patti, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Paolo</given-names>
            <surname>Rosso</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>Evalita 2018: Overview on the 6th evaluation campaign of natural language processing and speech tools for italian</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Tommaso Caselli</source>
          , Nicole Novielli, Viviana Patti, and Paolo Rosso, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of the Sixth Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>co-located with the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it</article-title>
          <year>2018</year>
          ), Turin, Italy,
          <source>December 12-13</source>
          ,
          <year>2018</year>
          , volume
          <volume>2263</volume>
          <source>of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Walter</given-names>
            <surname>Daelemans</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Mike Kestemont, Enrique Manjavacas, Martin Potthast, Francisco Rangel, Paolo Rosso, Gu¨nther Specht, Efstathios Stamatatos, Benno Stein,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Michael</given-names>
            <surname>Tschuggnall</surname>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of pan 2019: Bots and gender profiling, celebrity profiling, cross-domain authorship attribution and style change detection</article-title>
          .
          <source>In International Conference of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>402</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>416</lpage>
          . Springer.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Felice</given-names>
            <surname>Dell'Orletta</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Malvina</given-names>
            <surname>Nissim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the EVALITA 2018 cross-genre gender prediction (GxG) task</article-title>
          . In Tommaso Caselli, Nicole Novielli, Viviana Patti, and Paolo Rosso, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of the Sixth Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>co-located with the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it</article-title>
          <year>2018</year>
          ), Turin, Italy,
          <source>December 12-13</source>
          ,
          <year>2018</year>
          , volume
          <volume>2263</volume>
          <source>of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Jacob</given-names>
            <surname>Devlin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ming-Wei</surname>
            <given-names>Chang</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Kenton</given-names>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>and Kristina</given-names>
            <surname>Toutanova</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <article-title>BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of NAACL</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>4171</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>4186</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Lucie</given-names>
            <surname>Flekova</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jordan Carpenter</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Salvatore Giorgi, Lyle Ungar, and Daniel Preo¸
          <fpage>tiuc</fpage>
          -Pietro.
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>Analyzing biases in human perception of user age and gender from text</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>843</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>854</lpage>
          , Berlin, Germany, August. Association for Computational Linguistics.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Roberto</surname>
            <given-names>Labadie</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Daniel Castro Castro, and Reynier Ortega Bueno.
          <year>2020</year>
          .
          <article-title>UOBIT@TAG-it: Exploring a multi-faceted representation for profiling age, topic and gender in Italian texts</article-title>
          . In Valerio Basile, Danilo Croce, Maria Di Maro, and Lucia C. Passaro, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of Seventh Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          ),
          <article-title>Online</article-title>
          . CEUR.org.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Aleksandra</given-names>
            <surname>Maslennikova</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Paolo Labruna,
          <source>Andrea Cimino, and Felice Dell'Orletta</source>
          .
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <article-title>Quanti anni hai? age identification for italian</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of 6th Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it)</source>
          ,
          <fpage>13</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>15</lpage>
          November,
          <year>2019</year>
          , Bari, Italy.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Maria</given-names>
            <surname>Medvedeva</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Hessel Haagsma, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Malvina</given-names>
            <surname>Nissim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>An analysis of cross-genre and ingenre performance for author profiling in social media</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the CLEF Association, CLEF</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          , Dublin, Ireland,
          <source>September 11-14</source>
          ,
          <year>2017</year>
          , pages
          <fpage>211</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>223</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Debora</given-names>
            <surname>Nozza</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Federico Bianchi, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Dirk</given-names>
            <surname>Hovy</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2020</year>
          .
          <article-title>What the [MASK]? Making sense of language-specific BERT models</article-title>
          . arXiv:
          <year>2003</year>
          .02912.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Daniela</given-names>
            <surname>Occhipinti</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Andrea Tesei, Maria Iacono, Carlo Aliprandi, and Lorenzo De Mattei.
          <year>2020</year>
          .
          <article-title>ItaliaNLP @ TAG-IT: UmBERTo for Author Profiling at TAGit 2020</article-title>
          . In Valerio Basile, Danilo Croce, Maria Di Maro, and Lucia C. Passaro, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of Seventh Evaluation Campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. Final Workshop (EVALITA</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          ),
          <article-title>Online</article-title>
          . CEUR.org.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Fabian</given-names>
            <surname>Pedregosa</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Gae¨l Varoquaux, Alexandre Gramfort, Vincent Michel, Bertrand Thirion, Olivier Grisel, Mathieu Blondel,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Peter</given-names>
            <surname>Prettenhofer</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Ron Weiss,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vincent Dubourg</surname>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <year>2011</year>
          .
          <article-title>Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of machine learning research</source>
          ,
          <volume>12</volume>
          (Oct):
          <fpage>2825</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>2830</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Francisco</given-names>
            <surname>Rangel</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Paolo Rosso, Martin Potthast, Benno Stein, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Walter</given-names>
            <surname>Daelemans</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2015</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the 3rd Author Profiling Task at PAN 2015</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>In Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs</article-title>
          .
          <source>CEUR Workshop Proceedings.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Francisco</given-names>
            <surname>Rangel</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Paolo Rosso, Ben Verhoeven, Walter Daelemans,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Martin</given-names>
            <surname>Potthast</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Benno</given-names>
            <surname>Stein</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the 4th Author Profiling Task at PAN 2016: Cross-genre Evaluations</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2016 Evaluation Labs. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Francisco</given-names>
            <surname>Rangel</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Paolo Rosso,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Martin</given-names>
            <surname>Potthast</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Benno</given-names>
            <surname>Stein</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the 5th author profiling task at PAN 2017: Gender and language variety identification in twitter</article-title>
          .
          <source>Working Notes Papers of the CLEF.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Delip</given-names>
            <surname>Rao</surname>
          </string-name>
          , David Yarowsky,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Abhishek</given-names>
            <surname>Shreevats</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Manaswi</given-names>
            <surname>Gupta</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          .
          <article-title>Classifying latent user attributes in twitter</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Search and mining usergenerated contents</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>37</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>44</lpage>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H Andrew</given-names>
            <surname>Schwartz</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Johannes C Eichstaedt, Margaret L Kern, Lukasz Dziurzynski, Stephanie M Ramones,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Megha</given-names>
            <surname>Agrawal</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Achal Shah, Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell,
          <source>Martin EP Seligman</source>
          , et al.
          <year>2013</year>
          .
          <article-title>Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: The open-vocabulary approach</article-title>
          .
          <source>PloS One</source>
          ,
          <volume>8</volume>
          (
          <issue>9</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>e73791</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rob van der Goot</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Nikola Ljubesˇic´,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ian</surname>
            <given-names>Matroos</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Malvina Nissim, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Barbara</given-names>
            <surname>Plank</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>Bleaching text: Abstract features for cross-lingual gender prediction</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics</source>
          , volume
          <volume>2</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>383</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>389</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Ben</given-names>
            <surname>Verhoeven</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Walter Daelemans, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Barbara</given-names>
            <surname>Plank</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>Twisty: A multilingual twitter stylometry corpus for gender and personality profiling</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Nicoletta Calzolari (Conference Chair)</source>
          , Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Sara Goggi, Marko Grobelnik, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Helene Mazo, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk, and Stelios Piperidis, editors,
          <source>Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC</source>
          <year>2016</year>
          ), Paris, France.
          <source>European Language Resources Association (ELRA).</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>