Datasets › Sentiment Merged

Sentiment Merged (SST-3, DynaSent R1/R2)

Introduced by James P. Beno in ELECTRA and GPT-4o: Cost-Effective Partners for Sentiment Analysis29 Dec 2024 archive 2025-07-28

This is a dataset for 3-way sentiment classification of reviews (negative, neutral, positive). It is a merge of Stanford Sentiment Treebank (SST-3) and DynaSent Rounds 1 and 2, licensed under Apache 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 respectively. The SST-3, DynaSent R1, and DynaSent R2 datasets were randomly mixed to form a new dataset with 102,097 Train examples, 5,421 Validation examples, and 6,530 Test examples. See Table 1 for the distribution of labels within this merged dataset.

Table 1: Label Distribution for the Merged Dataset
Split Negative Neutral Positive
Train 21,910 49,148 31,039
Validation 1,868 1,669 1,884
Test 2,352 1,829 2,349
Table 2: Contribution of Sources to the Merged Dataset
Dataset Samples Percent (%)
DynaSent R1 Train 80,488 78.83
DynaSent R2 Train 13,065 12.80
SST-3 Train 8,544 8.37
Total 102,097 100.00
Source Datasets

SST-5 is the Stanford Sentiment Treebank 5-way classification (positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative, negative). To create SST-3 (positive, neutral, negative), the 'somewhat positive' class was merged and treated as 'positive'. Similarly, the 'somewhat negative class' was merged and treated as 'negative'.

DynaSent is a sentiment analysis dataset and dynamic benchmark with three classification labels: positive, negative, and neutral. The dataset was created in two rounds. First, a RoBERTa model was fine-tuned on a variety of datasets including SST-3, IMBD, and Yelp. They then extracted challenging sentences that fooled the model, and validated them with humans. For Round 2, a new RoBERTa model was trained on similar (but different) data, including the Round 1 dataset. The Dynabench platform was then used to create sentences written by workers that fooled the model.

It’s worth noting that the source datasets all have class imbalances. SST-3 positive and negative are about twice the number of neutral. In DynaSent R1, the neutral are more than three times the negative. And in DynaSent R2, the positive are more than double the neutral. Although this imbalance may be by design for DynaSent (to focus on the more challenging neutral class), it still represents an imbalanced dataset. The risk is that the model will learn mostly the dominant class. Merging the data helps mitigate this imbalance. Although there is still a majority of neutral examples in the training dataset, the neutral to negative ratio in DynaSent R1 is 3.21, and this is improved to 2.24 in the merged dataset.

Another potential issue is that the models will learn the dominant dataset, which is DynaSent R1. See Table 2 for a breakdown of the sources contributing to the Merged dataset.

Benchmarks archive 2025-07-28

All 1 leaderboard whose dataset resolves to this page shown (sort by any header). "First row" is the archive's own first row at snapshot, in the archive's row order; nothing here re-ranks and metric direction is not asserted.

First row (archive order)PaperCode
Sentiment Analysis Sentiment Merged GPT-4o Fine-Tuned (Minimal) Macro F1 86.99 ELECTRA and GPT-4o: Cost-Effective Partners for... jbeno/sentiment 10 Compare

Papers archive 2025-07-28

1 shown of 1 paper with a leaderboard row on this dataset's benchmarks, newest first. The archive's own "papers using this dataset" list was never published, so this is the benchmark-backed subset; the archive's count for this dataset is 1. The Syntology column is from Syntology's graph (read 2026-09-24), stated per sample; it is not part of any archive number.

DateSamples run Syntology
ELECTRA and GPT-4o: Cost-Effective Partners for Sentiment Analysis 1 10 29 Dec 2024 not harvested

Dataset loaders archive 2025-07-28

No loader listed in the archive.

Tasks archive 2025-07-28

License archive 2025-07-28

MIT

Modalities archive 2025-07-28

Languages archive 2025-07-28

Variants archive 2025-07-28

  • Sentiment Merged

1 variant name, as the archive lists them.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections