Papers › Does BERT Understand Sentiment? Leveraging Comparisons Between Contextual and...
Does BERT Understand Sentiment? Leveraging Comparisons Between Contextual and Non-Contextual Embeddings to Improve Aspect-Based Sentiment Models
Natesh Reddy, Pranaydeep Singh, Muktabh Mayank Srivastava
When performing Polarity Detection for different words in a sentence, we need to look at the words around to understand the sentiment. Massively pretrained language models like BERT can encode not only just the words in a document but also the context around the words along with them. This begs the questions, "Does a pretrain language model also automatically encode sentiment information about each word?" and "Can it be used to infer polarity towards different aspects?". In this work we try to answer this question by showing that training a comparison of a contextual embedding from BERT and a generic word embedding can be used to infer sentiment. We also show that if we finetune a subset of weights the model built on comparison of BERT and generic word embedding, it can get state of the art results for Polarity Detection in Aspect Based Sentiment Classification datasets.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) | SemEval-2014 Task-4 | BERT-IL Finetuned | Restaurant (Acc) | 86.20 | #44 of 48 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
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