1. Text Analytics Software Choosing the Right Fit Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group http://www.kapsgroup.com Text Analytics World October 20 New York

2. 2 Agenda  Introduction – Text Analytics Basics  Evaluation Process & Methodology – Two Stages – Initial Filters & POC  Proof of Concept – Methodology – Results  Text Analytics and “Text Analytics”  Conclusions

3. 3 KAPS Group: General  Knowledge Architecture Professional Services  Virtual Company: Network of consultants – 8-10  Partners – SAS, SAP, FAST, Smart Logic, Concept Searching, etc.  Consulting, Strategy, Knowledge architecture audit  Services: – Taxonomy/Text Analytics development, consulting, customization – Evaluation of Enterprise Search, Text Analytics – Text Analytics Assessment, Fast Start – Technology Consulting – Search, CMS, Portals, etc. – Knowledge Management: Collaboration, Expertise, e-learning – Applied Theory – Faceted taxonomies, complexity theory, natural categories

4. 4 Introduction to Text Analytics Text Analytics Features  Noun Phrase Extraction – Catalogs with variants, rule based dynamic – Multiple types, custom classes – entities, concepts, events – Feeds facets  Summarization – Customizable rules, map to different content  Fact Extraction – Relationships of entities – people-organizations-activities – Ontologies – triples, RDF, etc.  Sentiment Analysis – Rules – Objects and phrases

5. 5 Introduction to Text Analytics Text Analytics Features  Auto-categorization – Training sets – Bayesian, Vector space – Terms – literal strings, stemming, dictionary of related terms – Rules – simple – position in text (Title, body, url) – Semantic Network – Predefined relationships, sets of rules – Boolean– Full search syntax – AND, OR, NOT – Advanced – DIST(#), ORDDIST#, PARAGRAPH, SENTENCE  This is the most difficult to develop  Build on a Taxonomy  Combine with Extraction – If any of list of entities and other words

6. Case Study – Categorization & Sentiment 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. Evaluation Process & Methodology Overview  Start with Self Knowledge – Think Big, Start Small, Scale Fast  Eliminate the unfit – Filter One- Ask Experts - reputation, research – Gartner, etc. Market strength of vendor, platforms, etc. Feature scorecard – minimum, must have, filter to top 3 – Filter Two – Technology Filter – match to your overall scope and capabilities – Filter not a focus – Filter Three – In-Depth Demo – 3-6 vendors  Deep POC (2) – advanced, integration, semantics  Focus on working relationship with vendor. 9

10. Design of the Text Analytics Selection Team Traditional Candidates – IT&, Business, Library  IT - Experience with software purchases, needs assess, budget – Search/Categorization is unlike other software, deeper look  Business -understand business, focus on business value  They can get executive sponsorship, support, and budget – But don’t understand information behavior, semantic focus  Library, KM - Understand information structure  Experts in search experience and categorization – But don’t understand business or technology 10

11. Design of the Text Analytics Selection Team  Interdisciplinary Team, headed by Information Professionals  Relative Contributions – IT – Set necessary conditions, support tests – Business – provide input into requirements, support project – Library – provide input into requirements, add understanding of search semantics and functionality  Much more likely to make a good decision  Create the foundation for implementation 11

12. Evaluating Taxonomy/Text Analytics Software Start with Self Knowledge  Strategic and Business Context  Info Problems – what, how severe  Strategic Questions – why, what value from the text analytics, how are you going to use it – Platform or Applications?  Formal Process - KA audit – content, users, technology, business and information behaviors, applications - Or informal for smaller organization,  Text Analytics Strategy/Model – forms, technology, people – Existing taxonomic resources, software  Need this foundation to evaluate and to develop 12

13. 13 Varieties of Taxonomy/ Text Analytics Software  Taxonomy Management – Synaptica, SchemaLogic  Full Platform – SAS, SAP, Smart Logic, Linguamatics, Concept Searching, Expert System, IBM, GATE  Embedded – Search or Content Management – FAST, Autonomy, Endeca, Exalead, etc. – Nstein, Interwoven, Documentum, etc.  Specialty / Ontology (other semantic) – Sentiment Analysis – Lexalytics, Clarabridge, Lots of players – Ontology – extraction, plus ontology

14. Vendors of Taxonomy/ Text Analytics Software – Attensity – Business Objects – Inxight – Clarabridge – ClearForest – Concept Searching – Data Harmony / Access Innovations – Expert Systems – GATE (Open Source) – IBM Infosphere – Lexalytics – Multi-Tes – Nstein – SAS – SchemaLogic – Smart Logic – Synaptica 14

15. 15 Initial Evaluation – Factors Traditional Software Evaluation - Deeper  Basic & Advanced Capabilities  Lack of Essential Feature – No Sentiment Analysis, Limited language support  Customization vs. OOB – Strongest OOB – highest customization cost  Company experience, multiple products vs. platform  Ease of integration – API’s, Java – Internal and External Applications – Technical Issues, Development Environment  Total Cost of Ownership and support, initial price  POC Candidates – 1-4

16. 16 Initial Evaluation – Factors Case Studies  Amdocs – Customer Support Notes – short, badly written, millions of documents – Total Cost, multiple languages, Integration with their application – Distributed expertise – Platform – resell full range of services, Sentiment Analysis – Twenty to Four to POC (Two) to SAS  GAO – Library of 200 page PDF formal documents, plus public web site – People – library staff – 3-4 taxonomists – centralized expertise – Enterprise search, general public – Twenty to POC with SAS

17. Phase II - Proof Of Concept - POC  Measurable Quality of results is the essential factor  4 weeks POC – bake off / or short pilot  Real life scenarios, categorization with your content  2 rounds of development, test, refine / Not OOB  Need SME’s as test evaluators – also to do an initial categorization of content  Majority of time is on auto-categorization  Need to balance uniformity of results with vendor unique capabilities – have to determine at POC time  Taxonomy Developers – expert consultants plus internal taxonomists 17

18. 18 POC Design: Evaluation Criteria & Issues  Basic Test Design – categorize test set – Score – by file name, human testers  Categorization & Sentiment – Accuracy 80-90% – Effort Level per accuracy level  Quantify development time – main elements  Comparison of two vendors – how score? – Combination of scores and report  Quality of content & initial human categorization – Normalize among different test evaluators  Quality of taxonomists – experience with text analytics software and/or experience with content and information needs and behaviors  Quality of taxonomy – structure, overlapping categories

19. Text Analytics POC Outcomes Evaluation Factors  Variety & Limits of Content – Twitter to large formal libraries  Quality of Categorization – Scores – Recall, Precision (harder) – Operators – NOT, DIST, START,  Development Environment & Methodology – Toolkit or Integrated Product – Effort Level and Usability  Importance of relevancy – can be used for precision, applications  Combination of workbench, statistical modeling  Measures – scores, reports, discussions 19

20. POC and Early Development: Risks and Issues  CTO Problem –This is not a regular software process  Semantics is messy not just complex – 30% accuracy isn’t 30% done – could be 90%  Variability of human categorization  Categorization is iterative, not “the program works” – Need realistic budget and flexible project plan  Anyone can do categorization – Librarians often overdo, SME’s often get lost (keywords)  Meta-language issues – understanding the results – Need to educate IT and business in their language 20

21. Text Analytics and “Text Analytics” – Text Mining  TA is pre-processing for text mining  TA adds huge dimensions of unstructured text – Now 85-90% of all content, Social Media  TA can improve the quality of text – Categorization, Disambiguated metadata extraction  Unstructured text into data - What are the possibilities? – New Kinds of Taxonomies – emotion, small smart modular – Information Overload – search, facets, auto-tagging, etc. – Behavior Prediction – individual actions (cancel or not?) – Customer & Business Intelligence – new relationships – Crowd sourcing – technical support – Expertise Analysis – documents, authors, communities 21

22. Conclusion  Start with self-knowledge – what will you use it for? – Current Environment – technology, information  Basic Features are only filters, not scores  Integration – need an integrated team (IT, Business, KA) – For evaluation and development  POC – your content, real world scenarios – not scores  Foundation for development, experience with software – Development is better, faster, cheaper  Categorization is essential, time consuming  Text Analytics opens up new worlds of applications 22

23. Questions? Tom Reamy tomr@kapsgroup.com KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services http://www.kapsgroup.com