Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
- Identify all proper nouns using POS tag- 5. Overall sentiment analysis
ging - Using syntactic meta data, phrases con-
- Input a list of known characters of the taining noun, adjective, verb and ad-
Mahabharata story (widely available on verbs are identified.
the internet).
- The above text is tokenized using stan-
- Input a thesaurus of equivalent dard NLP techniques.
names for the characters (also widely
- The tokens are POS (parts of speech)
known, e.g. Draupadi=Panchali, Ar-
tagged and tagged tokens are mapped to
juna=Phalguni etc.) to merge equivalent
synsets in Wordnet in a word sense dis-
names.
ambiguation process.
- Filter out a list of known place names
- The sentiment scores are picked up from
in ancient India and its neighbouring re-
SentiWordnet for each synset.
gions.
- Overall sentiment of the parva is derived
- Apply a threshold to retain names whose
from these values by summing the con-
frequency is above a minimum value
stituent sentiment scores.
(resulting in 210 characters for the Ma-
habharata story). 6. Sentiment analysis for main characters
- Retain only those characters which are
- Similarly sentiment analysis of each
in the top 30 percent of characters men-
protagonist is done by extracting the
tioned in a given parva (resulting in
sentences where the protagonist ap-
about 70 characters overall). Same logic
pears. This is done for each parva.
is followed for both individual and cu-
mulative analysis of each parva. 7. Emotion analysis
The following steps are carried out separately - Emotion analysis for the full text and
for each parva and also for the entire text. each of the protagonists is done with
3. Co-occurrence analysis the help of NRC word-emotion associ-
ation lexicon. After extracting the rele-
- Compute a co-occurrence matrix for vant part of the corpus,the score is cal-
the identified characters using sen- culated for each POS (part of speech)
tence boundaries as windows of co- tagged token for each emotion and fi-
occurrence. nally summed up. The obvious limita-
- Build a social graph from the co- tion with any lexicon based approach is
occurrence matrix. 221 the limitation imposed by the size of the
lexicon itself and this limitation does ap- - Amongst the princesses and queen
ply to our analysis as well. mothers, Kunti turns out to be the un-
derstated (in the existing literary anal-
We have used the Python, NLTK(Natural Lan- ysis) power behind the scene (having a
guage Toolkit), various open source libraries large ego network and high centralities).
(TextBlob, Networkx, Stanford SNAP, Gephi) and Her low eigenvector centrality leads to
data analytics/visualization software Tableau in false perception that she is not impor-
our work. tant. Other main lady characters (Gand-
hari, Madri, Draupadi) are low on be-
4 Analysis of results tweenness as their influence is limited to
4.1 The protagonists one camp.
We have tried out 3 different approaches to iden- 4.2 The words say a lot
tify the protagonists.
Word clouds show a marked difference be-
tween the protagonists as shown in Figure.3a to
- Most frequently mentioned character: As
Figure.3d. These are drawn by extracting adjec-
shown in Figure.1a, this method finds the
tives from respective corpus.
most frequent characters. However this
misses out the protagonists who are unfortu- - Both Arjuna and Bhima are mighty and
nately low on frequency but may be impor- warrior. But Arjuna has words like great,
tant otherwise. excellent, capable, celestial whereas
Bhima has terrible, fierce etc. So Arjuna
- Size of the ego network: Size of ego net-
is the best in his class whereas Bhima is a
work (number of nodes directly connected)
mighty warrior with terrible anger.
calculated from Mahabharata social network
produces different results. As shown in - Bhisma has invincible, principal, virtu-
Figure.1b, Kripa who is a teacher of the ous whereas Krishna has celestial, beau-
princes, is topping the list. Chieftains like tiful, illustrious. So, Bhisma sounds more
Shalya, Virata, Drupada come towards the like an invincible warrior famous for his
top in this list. Kunti(mother of Pandavas), virtue, whereas Krishna is almost godly.
Indra (the king of gods) and Narada (the
sage) are also in this list being well con- - For Duryodhana, wicked, terrible etc.
nected! stand out whereas for Yudhisthira, virtuous
and righteous are key words. Both are
- Centrality metrics: The betweenness, leaders of their respective camps but they are
eigenvector, closeness and degree centrality poles apart.
are compared. Few observations can be made
out of this from Figure.2: 4.3 Sentiments across the text
Mahabharata takes the readers through a roller
- Betweenness centrality differentiates coaster ride of sentiment as shown in Figure.4.
the main protagonists whereas other Aadi parva(1) starts on a positive note but the
centrality metrics are mostly equivalent. Sabha parva (2) brings lot of negativity with the
- Arjuna, Karna, Krishna, Yudhisthira, game of dice. Vana parva(3) is again positive
Bhisma, Kunti and Drona are the top as Panadavs in spite of being in exile, make lot of
few in terms of all four centrality. They friends and have achievements. Virat parva(4)
are the most important protagonists. is negative as the Pandavas have to live in disguise
- Some of the personalities with very doing odd jobs. Udyog Parva (5) is again pos-
large ego network are having very low itive with both sides are very hopeful of winning
betweenness centrality and not making war. After that as elders and leaders get killed in
into the top list (Kripa, Shalya, Drupada, the battle, it is a downward slide of sentiment with
Virata etc.) because their influence is Duryodhanas death bringing in positive emotion
limited to one camp i.e. Kaurava or Pan- in Shalya parva(9). In Stri parva (11), the
dava. Their importance is mostly local.222 destruction is complete and sentiment reaches the
(a) Frequency of occurrence (b) Size of ego network
(a) Arjuna word cloud (b) Bhima word cloud (c) Duryodhana word cloud (d) Yudhisthira word cloud
223
Figure 4: Sentiment across parvas of Mahabharata
(a) comparing sentiment: Krishna, Dhritarashtra (b) comparing sentiment: Drona, Bhisma
(a) comparing sentiment: Kunti, Gandhari (b) comparing sentiment: Yudhisthira, Duryodhana
Figure 226
10: Leadership
- The story of Mahabharata encompasses many
years before the battle, 18 days of battle
and around thirty six years after the battle.
The evolving social network of Mahabharata
across the parvas is analyzed using various
structural metrics viz. degree, average de-
gree, number of edges, number of maximal
cliques and density of the main core as well
as overall density. As shown in Figure.11a
and Figure.11b, various structural metrics of
the underlying social network tend to stabi-
(a) Considering diameter, degree and edge
lize towards the end after becoming desta-
bilised initially following Aristotelian frame-
work of stability-instability-stability.
Ricardo Alberich, Joe Miro-Julia, and Francesc Robert Plutchik. 1980. A general psychoevolutionary
Rossello. 2002. Marvel universe looks almost theory of emotion. Theories of emotion, 1:331.
like a real social network. arXiv preprint cond-
Jeff Rydberg-Cox. 2011. Social networks and the lan-
mat/0202174.
guage of greek tragedy. In Journal of the Chicago
Poetics Aristotle. 1968. Introduction, commentary and Colloquium on Digital Humanities and Computer
appendixes by dw lucas. Oxford, 125:16. Science, volume 1.
Andrew Beveridge and Jie Shan. 2016. Network of Graham Sack. 2012. Character networks for narrative
thrones. Math Horizons, 23(4):1822. generation. In Intelligent Narrative Technologies:
Papers from the 2012 AIIDE Workshop, AAAI Tech-
Vincent D Blondel, Jean-Loup Guillaume, Renaud nical Report WS-12-14, pages 3843.
Lambiotte, and Etienne Lefebvre. 2008. Fast un-
folding of communities in large networks. Jour- James Stiller, Daniel Nettle, and Robin IM Dunbar.
nal of statistical mechanics: theory and experiment, 2003. The small world of shakespeares plays. Hu-
2008(10):P10008. man Nature, 14(4):397408.