Downloads provided by UsageCounts
The Webis Clickbait Corpus 2016 (Webis-Clickbait-16) comprises 2992 Twitter tweets sampled from top 20 news publishers as per retweets in 2014. The tweets have been manually annotated by three independent annotators with regard to whether they can be considered clickbait. A total of 767 tweets are considered clickbait by the majority of annotators. The majority vote of reviewers can be used as a ground truth to build clickbait detection technology. This corpus is the first of its kind and gives rise to the development of technology to tackle clickbait.
{"references": ["Martin Potthast, Sebastian K\u00f6psel, Benno Stein, and Matthias Hagen. Clickbait Detection. In Nicola Ferro et al, editors, Advances in Information Retrieval. 38th European Conference on IR Research (ECIR 2016) volume 9626 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 810-817, Berlin Heidelberg New York, March 2016. Springer"]}
clickbait
clickbait
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 51 | |
| downloads | 10 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts