Dynamic Topic Modeling for Cross-Corpus Temporal Analysis
Organizations: Columbia University New York, NY, USA · Department of Sociology and Columbia Business School Columbia University New York, NY, USA
Abstract
Dynamic Embedded Topic Models (D-ETM) provide an interpretable framework for modeling temporal semantic evolution, but cross-corpus comparison remains difficult because topics are often learned independently and aligned only after training, a process that does not guarantee stable topic correspondence across corpora and time. To address this problem, we propose a D-ETM framework that first learns a common dynamic topic space over a merged multi-corpus collection, which we call the shared backbone, then introduces corpus-specific residual adaptation around the frozen backbone without creating separate latent topic spaces. This design preserves a shared topic index for cross-corpus comparison while allowing each corpus to specialize lexically. We evaluate the framework on three temporally structured corpora spanning 97 years: the Corpus of Historical American English, Harvard Business Review, and International Labour Review. Residual adaptation improves corpus-specific fit relative to the shared backbone while preserving the same-index cross-corpus topic trajectories, achieving substantially stronger alignment than full fine-tuning from the same backbone, with versus trajectory Retrieval@1, as well as stronger alignment than independent training with post-hoc Hungarian matching. These results suggest that incorporating topic alignment into the model can support more stable over-time cross-corpus comparisons while retaining corpus-specific lexical variation.
Figures & tables
| Corpus | Train | Valid | Test | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COHA (Mag. / News, ) | 32,460 | 1,999 | 6,042 | 40,501 |
| HBR | 33,513 | 1,777 | 6,358 | 41,648 |
| ILR | 32,615 | 2,169 | 5,821 | 40,605 |
| Merged D | 98,588 | 5,945 | 18,221 | 122,754 |
| Condition | Description |
|---|---|
| Ind-CS | Independently train one D-ETM per corpus using that corpus’s own active vocabulary. This represents the standard independent-training setting, where cross-corpus comparison requires post-hoc topic matching. |
| Ind-MV | Independently train one D-ETM per corpus using the shared merged vocabulary. This controls for vocabulary differences while keeping the training process corpus-specific. |
| SB-Joint | Train a single D-ETM on the merged multi-corpus collection. This model learns the shared dynamic topic backbone used to define common topic indices across corpora. |
| SB-RA | Initialize from SB-Joint , freeze the shared backbone, and learn source-specific residual topic offsets. This is the proposed method for corpus-local lexical specialization while preserving shared topic identities. |
| SB-FT | Initialize from SB-Joint and fully fine-tune all model parameters separately on each corpus. This provides a less constrained adaptation baseline that tests what happens when the shared backbone is not preserved. |
| Source | Ind-CS | Ind-MV | SB-Joint | SB-RA | SB-FT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COHA | 6,042 | 6,446.75 | 6,458.27 | 9,819.13 | 7,896.94 | 6,364.36 |
| HBR | 6,358 | 2,479.74 | 2,530.01 | 2,570.88 | 2,396.78 | 2,127.39 |
| ILR | 5,821 | 1,722.68 | 1,701.09 | 1,561.29 | 1,486.90 | 1,320.03 |
| Setup | TD | TC | TQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ind-CS-COHA | 0.5843 | 0.0551 | 0.2300 | 0.0322 |
| Ind-CS-HBR | 0.5304 | 0.0460 | 0.1968 | 0.0244 |
| Ind-CS-ILR | 0.4494 | 0.0350 | 0.2172 | 0.0157 |
| Ind-MV-COHA | 0.5810 | 0.0558 | 0.2229 | 0.0324 |
| Ind-MV-HBR | 0.5015 | 0.0413 | 0.1975 | 0.0207 |
| Ind-MV-ILR | 0.4824 | 0.0377 | 0.2198 | 0.0182 |
| Method | Same JSD | Hung. JSD | Margin | R@1 | ||
| Ind-CS | – | – | – | 0.594 | – | – |
| Ind-MV | – | – | – | 0.619 | – | – |
| SB-RA | ||||||
| SB-RA | ||||||
| SB-RA | ||||||
| SB-RA |
| Method | Same JSD | Hung. JSD | Margin | R@1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | SB-RA | 0.257 | 0.257 | +0.106 | 85.0% |
| SB-FT | 0.533 | 0.526 | -0.058 | 26.7% | |
| 20 | SB-RA | 0.170 | 0.170 | +0.164 | 98.3% |
| SB-FT | 0.592 | 0.573 | -0.074 | 17.5% | |
| 30 | SB-RA | 0.106 | 0.106 | +0.196 | 100.0% |
| SB-FT | 0.570 | 0.553 | -0.087 | 13.9% |
| SB-Joint time | SB-RA time | SB-FT time | Peak GPU memory | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 57m 26s | 13m 11s | 14m 53s | 3.14 GB |
| 30 | 82m 13s | 18m 21s | 20m 07s | 7.51 GB |
| Avg. Top-30 overlap | Avg. # outside shared Top-30 | |
|---|---|---|
| COHA | 0.853 0.106 | 4.42 3.19 |
| HBR | 0.790 0.103 | 6.31 3.08 |
| ILR | 0.791 0.131 | 6.26 3.93 |
| Industrial crisis | Corporate management | Workplace organization | Digital services | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1922–1942 | 1947–1977 | 1982–1992 | 1997–2017 | |
| COHA | man, credit, public, power, department, material, period, place | control, policy, operation, production, price, service, major, small | information, change, state, price, rate, power, group, small | people, world, group, price, return, board, industry, cost |
| HBR | bank, rate, export, cost, material, credit, income, investment | profit, sale, capital, investment, product, price, rate, tax | price, capital, competition, investment, product, company, profit, corporate | cost, product, customer, sale, consumer, manager, stock, revenue |
| ILR | wage, labor, worker, condition, factory, rate, income, country | worker, labor, country, wage, policy, income, estimate, level | policy, level, worker, labor, trade, economic, rate, price | social, worker, labor, job, pay, country, level, cost |
| Industrial crisis 1922–1942 | Corporate / welfare 1947–1977 | Workplace reorganization 1982–1992 | Digital / labor market 1997–2017 |
Topic Modeling
Topic modeling discovers recurring themes and document-topic structure in text, helping organize, compare, and track large collections.
See all 57 papers