 LSTM used to predict the subjectivity of the sentence as additional guidance.

-   **RNCRF** [@wang-EtAl:2016:EMNLP20164]: CRF with high-level representations learned from Dependency Tree based Recursive Neural Network.

-   **CMLA** [@wang2017coupled]: CMLA is a multi-layer architecture where each layer consists of two coupled GRUs to model the relation between aspect terms and opinion words.

To clarify, our framework aims at extracting aspect terms where the opinion information is employed as auxiliary, while RNCRF and CMLA perform joint extraction of aspects and opinions. Nevertheless, the comparison between our framework and RNCRF/CMLA is still fair, because we do not use manually annotated opinions as used by RNCRF and CMLA, instead, we employ an existing opinion lexicon to provide weak opinion supervision.

Settings
--------

We pre-processed each dataset by lowercasing all words and replace all punctuations with `PUNCT`. We use pre-trained GloVe 840B vectors[^6] [@pennington2014glove] to initialize the word embeddings and the dimension (i.e., $\mathrm{dim}_w$) is 300. For out-of-vocabulary words, we randomly sample their embeddings from the uniform distribution $\mathcal{U}(-0.25, 0.25)$ as done in [@kim:2014:EMNLP2014]. All of the weight matrices except those in LSTMs are initialized from the uniform distribution $\mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the initialization of the matrices in LSTMs, we adopt Glorot Uniform strategy [@glorot2010understanding]. Besides, all biases are initialized as 0’s.

The model is trained with SGD. We apply dropout over the ultimate aspect/opinion features and the input word embeddings of LSTMs. The dropout rates are empirically set as 0.5. With 5-fold cross-validation on the training data of $D_2$, other hyper-parameters are set as follows: $dim^A_h=100$, $dim^O_h=30$; the number of cached historical aspect representations $N^A$ is 5; the learning rate of SGD is 0.07.

Main Results
------------

As shown in Table \[tab:main
LSTM used to predict the subjectivity of the sentence as additional steering. 

 -    * * RNCRF * *   [ @wang - EtAl:2016: EMNLP20164 ]: CRF with eminent - level representations memorize from Dependency Tree base Recursive Neural Network. 

 -    * * CMLA * *   [ @wang2017coupled ]: CMLA is a multi - layer architecture where each layer consist of two conjugate GRUs to model the relation between aspect terms and opinion words. 

 To clarify, our model aims at extracting aspect terms where the public opinion information is employed as auxiliary, while RNCRF and CMLA perform joint extraction of aspect and opinions. Nevertheless, the comparison between our framework and RNCRF / CMLA is even fair, because we do not use manually annotated opinions as use by RNCRF and CMLA, instead, we employ an existing opinion lexicon to leave weak opinion supervision. 

 Settings 
 -------- 

 We pre - processed each dataset by lowercasing all words and replace all punctuations with 'PUNCT `. We use pre - trained GloVe 840B vectors[^6 ]   [ @pennington2014glove ] to initialize the word embeddings and the dimension (i.e., $ \mathrm{dim}_w$) is 300. For out - of - vocabulary words, we randomly sample their embeddings from the uniform distribution $ \mathcal{U}(-0.25, 0.25)$ as done in   [ @kim:2014: EMNLP2014 ]. All of the weight matrix except those in LSTMs are initialized from the uniform distribution $ \mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the low-level formatting of the matrix in LSTMs, we espouse Glorot Uniform strategy   [ @glorot2010understanding ]. Besides, all biases are initialize as 0 ’s. 

 The model is trained with SGD. We apply dropout over the ultimate aspect / public opinion features and the input word embeddings of LSTMs. The dropout rates are empirically set as 0.5. With 5 - fold cross - establishment on the training data of $ D_2 $, other hyper - parameters are set as follows: $ dim^A_h=100 $, $ dim^O_h=30 $; the number of hoard historic aspect representations $ N^A$ is 5; the learning rate of SGD is 0.07. 

 Main result 
 ------------ 

 As shown in Table   \[tab: main
 LSHM used to predict the smbjectivity of tkw sentxnce as additioval guidance.

-   **RNCRF** [@wang-EtAl:2016:XMNLP20164]: CRF with high-level represdntations learned fron Dependencb Tree based Rsgursire Neural Networl.

-   **CMLA** [@watg2017coupled]: CMLA ir c multi-layer architecture where each layer vojsists of two soupkqd GDLs to model the relation betweeh aspecu terms and opiniom words.

To clarify, our framfworn aims at extractijg aspect tgdms qhere the opknion infogkation is gmployed as auxiliary, while RNCRW and CMLA perfirn jlhnt extractmon of aspects and opinionv. Neveryheless, the cokpacisob between our framewock and RNCRF/CMLA is ftill fais, yecause we do not use mqnualny atnotxred opjnmona as uded by RNCRF znd CMLA, inwtead, we employ an txifnong opinion mexicog eo provide weak opinion supervision.

Settpngs
--------

Se pre-processed each daraset by lowercasing wll words and replace all punctuations with `PUNCT`. We use pse-tramndd YooVe 840C vfctors[^6] [@pennington2014glove] to initialize the word qjbtddpngs and the dimeksion (i.e., $\mathrm{dim}_e$) ls 300. For out-of-vocxbularv wkrds, we randomly swmple treir wmbeddingf frpm the uniform distribution $\mathcal{U}(-0.25, 0.25)$ af done in [@kim:2014:EMNLP2014]. Apl of the wzight katrives except those in LSTOs ade initialixed from ffe uniform distrkbunion $\mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the initialyzation oh the matricds im LSTMf, we adopt Glorot Uniform strategy [@hloroj2010undervtanding]. Bfsides, all biases are initializxv as 0’s.

The modgl hs nrained wnth SGC. We apply drjpout over the ultimace aspdct/opinion featurxs and the igput word embafdings of LSVMs. The dwopoyt rqtes ard empirically srt as 0.5. Winh 5-fole cross-validation pn jhs training data of $D_2$, other hyper-psraoetqrd ere sqd as follows: $dim^X_h=100$, $aom^O_h=30$; ghe number iw cavhed historical aspewt rspresentations $N^A$ os 5; the leqrning rwte of SGD is 0.07.

Main Results
------------

As shlwn ii Tablx \[tab:maon
LSTM used to predict the subjectivity of as guidance. - [@wang-EtAl:2016:EMNLP20164]: CRF with Tree Recursive Neural Network. **CMLA** [@wang2017coupled]: CMLA a multi-layer architecture where each layer of two coupled GRUs to model the relation between aspect terms and opinion To clarify, our framework aims at extracting aspect terms where the opinion information employed auxiliary, RNCRF CMLA perform joint extraction of aspects and opinions. Nevertheless, the comparison between our framework and RNCRF/CMLA still fair, because we do not use manually opinions as used by and CMLA, instead, we employ existing lexicon to weak supervision. -------- We pre-processed dataset by lowercasing all words and replace all punctuations with `PUNCT`. We use pre-trained GloVe 840B vectors[^6] to initialize embeddings and dimension $\mathrm{dim}_w$) 300. For out-of-vocabulary randomly sample their embeddings from the 0.25)$ as done in [@kim:2014:EMNLP2014]. All of the matrices except in LSTMs are initialized from the distribution $\mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the initialization of the in LSTMs, we adopt Glorot Uniform strategy [@glorot2010understanding]. Besides, all biases are initialized as 0’s. is trained with SGD. apply dropout over ultimate features the word embeddings LSTMs. The dropout rates are empirically set as 0.5. With 5-fold on the training data of $D_2$, other hyper-parameters are set $dim^A_h=100$, the number of historical aspect representations $N^A$ 5; learning rate of SGD Main ------------ Table
 LSTM used to predict the subjeCtivity of tHe senTenCe aS aDditIonaL guidance.

-   **RNCRF** [@WAng-ETAl:2016:EMNLP20164]: CRF with high-levEl repReSEntaTIoNs leaRned froM dePENdeNcY TRee BaSEd recurSivE Neural network.

-   **CMLa** [@waNg2017Coupled]: CMLA iS A mUlti-layer aRchItecture wherE eaCh layeR cOnsISts of Two CouplEd GRUs TO model The relatiOn BEtween ASpect teRMS aNd opInion words.

To clariFY, oUR framework aims At extrAcTInG ASpeCt tErms where tHe OpiniON informATiON IS emPLoyed as auxiliAry, while RNCrf anD CMLA pErForM Joint eXtracTiON of Aspects and oPiniOns. NevertHeless, THe compaRIson betWeen ouR frAmeWork ANd rNcRF/cMla is STiLl fAIr, bEcause we Do NoT use mAnuaLLY ANnotAteD opiNions As used by RNCRF And cMLA, INstEad, we EmploY an eXiSting OpinioN lexiCoN to provide weak oPiniOn superviSioN.

SEttInGs
--------

We pRE-proceSseD eaCh datasEt by lowERcaSiNG ALl Words and replace all PuNCTuAtions wiTh `PUNCt`. we UsE Pre-trainEd glove 840B vECTors[^6] [@pEnniNGtOn2014glove] tO initiALiZe The word EmBeddinGs And The DimenSIon (i.E., $\mathrM{dim}_w$) is 300. FOr out-OF-vocabulary worDS, we randomly saMPlE THeIR embEddIngs from the UnifORm diStriBUtIon $\MAthcaL{U}(-0.25, 0.25)$ as dOnE In [@KIm:2014:EMNLP2014]. All of the weigHt MatricEs excEpt those in LSTms are initiALIZed from tHe unIFoRM distribution $\mAthcaL{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the inITializatIon of The matriCes in LSTMS, WE adopt GlOroT UnIfoRm sTRAtEgy [@glorot2010undeRSTandInG]. BesideS, alL biases Are IniTiaLizEd As 0’s.

The modEl is traiNeD wItH SgD. WE applY Dropout oVeR thE uLtiMate aSPect/opInion FeatUrEs ANd tHe input WOrD EMbedDiNgS of LsTMS. THe droPout RAteS are empIrically sEt aS 0.5. with 5-FoLd Cross-vaLidation on the TrAining data Of $d_2$, otHer hypER-ParameteRs are set as follows: $dim^A_h=100$, $dIM^O_h=30$; the nUmbEr of cAcheD historicAl aSpect rEprESentatIons $N^A$ Is 5; the LeArnING rate OF sGd is 0.07.

maIn Results
------------

AS SHowN in TaBlE \[tab:Main
 LSTM used to predict thesubjectivi ty of  th e s en tenc e as  additional gu i danc e.

-   **RNCRF** [@wa ng-Et Al : 2016 : EM NLP20 164]: C R Fw i thhi gh -le ve l  r epres ent ationslearned fr omDe pendency Tre e  b ased Recur siv e Neural Net wor k.

- **C M LA**[@w ang20 17coup l ed]: C MLA is amu l ti-lay e r archi t e ct urewhere each layerc on s ists of two co upledGR U st o  mo del  the relat io n bet w een asp e ct t e rms and opinion w ords.

To c l ari fy, ou rfra m eworkaimsat ext racting asp ectterms whe re the opinion informa tion i s e mpl oyed as  a uxi li a ry, wh ile RNC RF and C ML Aperfo rm j o i n t  ext rac tion  of a spects and op ini ons. Nev erthe less,  the  c ompar ison b etwee nour framework a nd R NCRF/CMLA  is  s til lfair, becaus e w e d o not u se manu a lly  a n n o ta ted opinions as us ed b yRNCRF an d CMLA ,  i ns t ead, weem plo y an e xisti ng o p in ion lexi con to pr ov ide wea kopinio nsup erv ision . 

Se ttings 
------- -

We pre-processede ach dataset b y  l o w er c asin g a ll words an d re p lace  all pu nct u ation s wit h` PU N CT`. We use pre-tra in ed Glo Ve 84 0B vectors[^6 ] [@pennin g t o n2014glo ve]t oi nitialize thewordembeddings and thedimen sion (i. e., $\mat h r m{dim}_w $)is300 . F o r  o ut-of-vocabul a r y wo rd s, we r and omly sa mpl e t hei r e mb eddings f rom theun if or mdis tribu t ion $\ma th cal {U }(- 0.25, 0.25)$  as d onein  [ @ kim :2014:E M NL P 2 014] .Al l of  th eweigh t ma t ric es exce pt thoseinL STMs  a re  initia lized from th euniform di st rib ution$ \ mathcal{ U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For the initial iza tionof t he matric esin LST Ms, we ado pt Glo rot U ni for m strat e g y[@g lo rot2010und e r sta nding ].  Bes ides, a ll biases are init i ali zed as 0’s.
The  mod e l  i s t r ai n edwi t h S G D . We apply drop out over t he ul timate asp e ct/ op inion f eatures  andt he inpu t word em beddingsof  LST M s . T he dropout  rates a re empiri c allys et  as 0 .5.  With5- fol d cro ss-val i dat ion o n thetr aining  data  o f $D_2$,  other hyper-parameters  are s et as  fo llows: $d im^ A _h= 100$, $di m^O_ h=30$; the  nu mbe r ofcac h ed hi stor i ca l a s pectrepr e sentation s  $ N^A $ is  5; the lea r n i ngrateofS GD is0.07 .

Main Results
- - ----------

As  sho w n  in  Ta b le \ [t ab:main
 LSTM_used to_predict the subjectivity of_the sentence_as_additional guidance.

-__ **RNCRF** [@wang-EtAl:2016:EMNLP20164]: CRF_with high-level representations_learned from Dependency Tree_based Recursive Neural_Network.

-_  **CMLA** [@wang2017coupled]: CMLA is a multi-layer architecture where each layer consists of two_coupled_GRUs to_model_the_relation between aspect terms and_opinion words.

To clarify, our framework_aims at_extracting aspect terms where the opinion information is_employed_as auxiliary, while_RNCRF and CMLA perform joint extraction of aspects and_opinions. Nevertheless, the comparison between our_framework and RNCRF/CMLA_is_still_fair, because we do_not use manually annotated opinions as_used by RNCRF and CMLA, instead,_we employ an existing opinion lexicon to_provide weak opinion supervision.

Settings
--------

We pre-processed each_dataset by lowercasing all words_and replace_all punctuations with `PUNCT`. We_use pre-trained GloVe_840B vectors[^6] [@pennington2014glove]_to initialize the_word embeddings and the dimension (i.e.,_$\mathrm{dim}_w$) is 300._For out-of-vocabulary words, we randomly sample_their_embeddings from the_uniform_distribution_$\mathcal{U}(-0.25, 0.25)$_as done in [@kim:2014:EMNLP2014]._All_of the_weight_matrices except those in LSTMs are_initialized_from the uniform distribution $\mathcal{U}(-0.2, 0.2)$. For_the initialization of the_matrices_in LSTMs, we adopt_Glorot Uniform strategy [@glorot2010understanding]. Besides, all_biases are initialized as 0’s.

The model_is trained_with SGD._We apply dropout over the ultimate aspect/opinion features and the input_word embeddings of LSTMs. The dropout_rates are empirically set_as 0.5._With_5-fold cross-validation on_the_training data_of $D_2$, other hyper-parameters are set as_follows: $dim^A_h=100$,_$dim^O_h=30$; the number of cached historical_aspect representations $N^A$ is_5;_the learning rate of SGD is_0.07.

Main Results
------------

As shown in Table \[tab:main