IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v200y2024ics136403212400296x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sentiment analysis of the United States public support of nuclear power on social media using large language models

Author

Listed:
  • Kwon, O. Hwang
  • Vu, Katie
  • Bhargava, Naman
  • Radaideh, Mohammed I.
  • Cooper, Jacob
  • Joynt, Veda
  • Radaideh, Majdi I.

Abstract

This study utilized large language models (LLMs) to analyze public sentiment in the United States (US) regarding nuclear power on social media, focusing on X/Twitter, considering climate change challenges and advancements in nuclear power technology. Approximately, 1.26 million nuclear tweets from 2008–2023 were examined to fine-tune LLMs for sentiment classification. We found the crucial role of accurate data labeling for model performance, with potential implications for a 15% improvement, achieved through high-confidence labels. LLMs demonstrated better performance compared to traditional machine learning classifiers, with reduced susceptibility to overfitting and up to 96% classification accuracy. LLMs are used to segment the US public tweets into policy and energy-related categories, revealing that 68% are politically themed. Policy tweets tended to convey negative sentiment, often reflecting opposing political perspectives and focusing on nuclear deals and international relations. Energy-related tweets covered diverse topics with predominantly neutral to positive sentiment, indicating broad support for nuclear power in 48 out of 50 US states. The US public positive sentiments toward nuclear power stemmed from its high power density, reliability regardless of weather conditions, environmental benefits, application versatility, and recent innovations and advancements in both fission and fusion technologies. Negative sentiments primarily focused on waste management, high capital costs, and safety concerns. The neutral campaign highlighted global nuclear facts and advancements, with varying tones leaning towards positivity or negativity. An interesting neutral theme was the advocacy for the combined use of renewable and nuclear energy to attain net-zero goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwon, O. Hwang & Vu, Katie & Bhargava, Naman & Radaideh, Mohammed I. & Cooper, Jacob & Joynt, Veda & Radaideh, Majdi I., 2024. "Sentiment analysis of the United States public support of nuclear power on social media using large language models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:200:y:2024:i:c:s136403212400296x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114570
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136403212400296X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114570?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kuhika Gupta & Joseph T. Ripberger & Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith & Carol L. Silva, 2020. "Exploring Aggregate vs. Relative Public Trust in Administrative Agencies that Manage Spent Nuclear Fuel in the United States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 491-510, July.
    2. Gupta, Kuhika & Nowlin, Matthew C. & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L., 2019. "Tracking the nuclear ‘mood’ in the United States: Introducing a long term measure of public opinion about nuclear energy using aggregate survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. Garrett, Kayla P. & McManamay, Ryan A. & Witt, Adam, 2023. "Harnessing the power of environmental flows: Sustaining river ecosystem integrity while increasing energy potential at hydropower dams," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    4. Yamagata, Hiroshi, 2024. "Public opinion on nuclear power plants in Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America: A prescription for peculiar Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. William A. Belson, 1959. "Matching and Prediction on the Principle of Biological Classification," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 8(2), pages 65-75, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hache, Emmanuel & Leboullenger, Déborah & Mignon, Valérie, 2017. "Beyond average energy consumption in the French residential housing market: A household classification approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 82-95.
    2. Piero Falorsi & Salvatore Filiberti & Antonio Pavone, 2006. "The new strategy for the concise presentation of sampling errors in the Italian Structural Business Statistics Survey," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 15(2), pages 243-265, August.
    3. Arndt, Christoph, 2023. "Climate change vs energy security? The conditional support for energy sources among Western Europeans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Gupta, Kuhika & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Fox, Andrew S. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L., 2021. "The future of nuclear energy in India: Evidence from a nationwide survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Mark K. McBeth & Megan Warnement Wrobel & Irene van Woerden, 2023. "Political ideology and nuclear energy: Perception, proximity, and trust," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(1), pages 88-118, January.
    6. Florentina Paraschiv & Dima Mohamad, 2020. "The Nuclear Power Dilemma—Between Perception and Reality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Piero Demetrio Falorsi & Salvatore Filiberti & Antonio Pavone, 2006. "The new strategy for the concise presentation of sampling errors in the Italian Structural Business Statistics Survey," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 15(2), pages 243-265, August.
    8. Sahar Ahmadzadeh & Tahmina Ajmal & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan & Yanqing Duan, 2023. "A Comprehensive Review on Food Waste Reduction Based on IoT and Big Data Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Lanxi Li & Alan Woodley & Timothy Chappell, 2024. "Mapping Urban Floods via Spectral Indices and Machine Learning Algorithms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-26, March.
    10. Yamagata, Hiroshi, 2024. "Public opinion on nuclear power plants in Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America: A prescription for peculiar Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Cotterman, Turner & Small, Mitchell J. & Wilson, Stephen & Abdulla, Ahmed & Wong-Parodi, Gabrielle, 2021. "Applying risk tolerance and socio-technical dynamics for more realistic energy transition pathways," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    12. Simone Quaresma Brandão & Erik Eduardo Rego & Rafaela Veiga Pillar & Renata Nogueira Francisco de Carvalho, 2024. "Hydropower Enhancing the Future of Variable Renewable Energy Integration: A Regional Analysis of Capacity Availability in Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-13, July.
    13. Bernard Dushimimana & Yvonne Wambui & Timothy Lubega & Patrick E. McSharry, 2020. "Use of Machine Learning Techniques to Create a Credit Score Model for Airtime Loans," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-11, August.
    14. Benjamin M. Abdel-Karim & Nicolas Pfeuffer & Oliver Hinz, 2021. "Machine learning in information systems - a bibliographic review and open research issues," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(3), pages 643-670, September.
    15. J. R. Lovering & S. H. Baker & T. R. Allen, 2021. "Social License in the Deployment of Advanced Nuclear Technology," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-13, July.
    16. Athanasios Anagnostis & Serafeim Moustakidis & Elpiniki Papageorgiou & Dionysis Bochtis, 2022. "A Hybrid Bimodal LSTM Architecture for Cascading Thermal Energy Storage Modelling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-24, March.
    17. Philip Baxter & Justin V. Hastings & Philseo Kim & Man‐Sung Yim, 2022. "Mapping the development of North Korea's domestic nuclear research networks," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(2), pages 219-246, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:200:y:2024:i:c:s136403212400296x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.