---
title: "Making Computers Laugh — paper by Mihalcea and Strapparava (2005)"
description: "The paper tests whether standard text classification can tell humorous sentences from serious ones. 15 references, cited by 87 papers here."
authors: ["Rada Mihalcea", "Carlo Strapparava"]
year: 2005
venue: "Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/H05-1067/"
licence: "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/mihalcea-2005-making-computers-laugh-investigations-automatic/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/mihalcea-2005-making-computers-laugh-investigations-automatic/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2005](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2005/) / Making Computers Laugh: Investigations in Automatic Humor Recognition

# Making Computers Laugh: Investigations in Automatic Humor Recognition

**Authors:** [Rada Mihalcea](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/rada-mihalcea/) and [Carlo Strapparava](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/carlo-strapparava/) · **Year:** 2005 · **Venue:** [Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/hlt/) ([HLT 2005](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/hlt/2005/)) · **Publisher:** [Association for Computational Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/association-for-computational-linguistics/) · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/H05-1067/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/H05-1067.pdf) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W7020755954)

**Citations:** 15 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14) · [87](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/mihalcea-2005-making-computers-laugh-investigations-automatic/cited-by/) in our library, of the 141,840 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
The paper tests whether standard text classification can tell humorous sentences from serious ones. It focuses on one-liners: very short jokes whose comic effect sits entirely in a single sentence. The authors built about 16,000 one-liners by bootstrapping from the Web, starting with only ten seed jokes. For negative examples they used three sets of short sentences chosen to resemble jokes in length and style: Reuters news titles, proverbs, and BNC sentences retrieved for their content similarity to each joke. They compared three kinds of features. The first were humor-oriented stylistic cues: alliteration, antonymy and slang. The second were content-based features in an ordinary text-classification setup, and the third combined both in a stacked learner. On balanced data, accuracy ranged from 79.15% (One-liners/BNC) to 96.95% (One-liners/Reuters), always clearly above the baselines. Learning curves level off after roughly 10,000 positive examples. The authors read this as a sign that better features, not more data, are the way forward. The work is presented as the first evidence that automatic classification can handle humor recognition.

## Key points
- **Data collection:** two bootstrapping rounds from 10 seed one-liners yielded about 24,000 candidates.
  - Removing near-duplicates with a longest-common-subsequence similarity measure left about 16,000.
  - A manual check of 200 random items found roughly 9% noise.
- **Negative sets:** Reuters titles (one year of newswire, 1996–1997), an online proverb collection, and BNC sentences.
  - The BNC sentences were retrieved with tf.idf and cosine similarity in the Smart system.
  - All negatives were limited to single sentences of about 10–15 words.
- **Stylistic features:** these were alliteration, antonymy and slang, with alliteration detected through an index over the CMU pronunciation dictionary.
  - Content features were used with classifiers including Naïve Bayes.
  - The two feature types were also merged via stacking.
- **Skewed data (75% negative / 25% humorous):** all methods still beat the 75% baseline.
  - Content features with Naïve Bayes reached 96.19% (Reuters), 81.56% (BNC) and 87.86% (Proverbs).
  - Stylistic features alone reached 87.49%, 77.62% and 76.20%.
- **Learning curves:** gains stop around 60% of the data. With BNC negatives the curve even dips slightly at the end, which the authors attribute to noise.

## Interesting ideas
- **Bootstrapping with two constraints.** The collector accepts a page only if its URL contains a theme keyword. It then harvests only sibling items in the same HTML list as a known example. This cheap, genre-aware scraping pattern could gather proverbs, slogans or headlines for low-resource languages such as Ukrainian.
- **Hard negatives by design.** The negatives match the positives in length, register and even topic, as with the BNC sentences retrieved per joke. This stops the classifier from relying on trivial surface cues, and the same approach suits any style or genre detection task.
- **Several negative sets as a difficulty scale.** Evaluating against easy (news titles) and hard (topically similar plain sentences) negatives shows how much of the result depends on the contrast class, not only on the target phenomenon.
- **Learning curves as a planning tool.** Plotting accuracy against training size helps decide whether to invest in more data or in richer features. A plateau points toward features, and a late drop can expose label noise.
- **Linguistic devices as explicit features.** Simple, interpretable signals, such as alliteration from a pronunciation dictionary or antonym pairs from a lexical resource, provide a transparent baseline. They can also be stacked with bag-of-words models.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [University of North Texas](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/university-of-north-texas/) — University, Denton, United States · 18 works · 4,513 citations
- [Istituto per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/labs/istituto-per-la-ricerca-scientifica-e-tecnologica/) — Research institute, Trento, Italy · 6 works · 2,436 citations

📚 Shelves (6): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 9,086 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 8,889 works · [🎭 Arts and Humanities](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/) · 9,296 works · [🗣️ Language and Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/language-and-linguistics/) · 9,206 works · [💭 Psychology](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/psychology/) · 798 works · [💭 Social Psychology](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/psychology/social-psychology/) · 129 works

## Cite

Cite as: Rada Mihalcea and Carlo Strapparava. 2005. Making Computers Laugh: Investigations in Automatic Humor Recognition. Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{mihalcea2005making,
  title = {{Making Computers Laugh: Investigations in Automatic Humor Recognition}},
  author = {Rada Mihalcea and Carlo Strapparava},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing},
  year = {2005},
  url = {https://aclanthology.org/H05-1067/}
}
```

- [← previous Machine Learning for Coreference Resolution: From Local Classification to Global Ranking](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/ng-2005-machine-learning-coreference-resolution-local/)
- [next → Morphological Analysis and Generation for Arabic Dialects](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/habash-2005-morphological-analysis-generation-arabic-dialects/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2005](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2005/)

## References

15 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. S. Attardo. 1994. Linguistic Theory of Humor. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=S%2E+Attardo%2E+1994%2E+Linguistic+Theory+of+Humor%2E+Mouton+de+Gruyter%2C+Berlin%2E)
2. K. Binsted and G. Ritchie. 1997. Computational rules for punning riddles. Humor, 10(1). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=K%2E+Binsted+and+G%2E+Ritchie%2E+1997%2E+Computational+rules+for+punning+riddles%2E+Humor%2C+10%281%29%2E)
3. C. Bucaria. 2004. Lexical and syntactic ambiguity as a source of humor. Humor, 17(3). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=C%2E+Bucaria%2E+2004%2E+Lexical+and+syntactic+ambiguity+as+a+source+of+humor%2E+Humor%2C+17%283%29%2E)
4. W. Daelemans, J. Zavrel, K. van der Sloot, and A. van den Bosch. 2001. Timbl: Tilburg memory based learner, version 4.0, reference guide. Technical report, University of Antwerp. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=W%2E+Daelemans%2C+J%2E+Zavrel%2C+K%2E+van+der+Sloot%2C+and+A%2E+van+den+Bosch%2E+2001%2E+Timbl%3A+Tilburg+memory+based+learner%2C+version+4%2E0%2C+reference+guide%2E+Technical+report%2C+University+of+Antwerp%2E)
5. S. Freud. 1905. Der Witz und Seine Beziehung zum Unbewussten. Deutike, Vienna. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=S%2E+Freud%2E+1905%2E+Der+Witz+und+Seine+Beziehung+zum+Unbewussten%2E+Deutike%2C+Vienna%2E)
6. T. Joachims. 1998. Text categorization with Support Vector Machines: learning with many relevant features. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Machine Learning. [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/joachims-1998-text-categorization-support-vector-machines/)
7. D.E. Knuth. 1993. The Stanford Graph Base: A Platform for combinatorial computing. ACM Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=D%2EE%2E+Knuth%2E+1993%2E+The+Stanford+Graph+Base%3A+A+Platform+for+combinatorial+computing%2E+ACM+Press%2E)
8. D. Lewis, Y. Yang, T. Rose, and F. Li. 2004. RCV1: A new benchmark collection for text categorization research. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 5:361–397. [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/lewis-2004-rcv1-benchmark-collection-text-categorization/)
9. A. McCallum and K. Nigam. 1998. A comparison of event models for Naive Bayes text classification. In Proceedings of AAAI-98 Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A%2E+McCallum+and+K%2E+Nigam%2E+1998%2E+A+comparison+of+event+models+for+Naive+Bayes+text+classification%2E+In+Proceedings+of+AAAI%2D98+Workshop+on+Learning+for+Text+Categorization%2E)
10. G. Miller. 1995. Wordnet: A lexical database. Communication of the ACM, 38(11):39–41. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=G%2E+Miller%2E+1995%2E+Wordnet%3A+A+lexical+database%2E+Communication+of+the+ACM%2C+38%2811%29%3A39%E2%80%9341%2E)
11. A. Nijholt, O. Stock, A. Dix, and J. Morkes, editors. 2003. Proceedings of CHI-2003 workshop: Humor Modeling in the Interface, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A%2E+Nijholt%2C+O%2E+Stock%2C+A%2E+Dix%2C+and+J%2E+Morkes%2C+editors%2E+2003%2E+Proceedings+of+CHI%2D2003+workshop%3A+Humor+Modeling+in+the+Interface%2C+Fort+Lauderdale%2C+Florida%2E)
12. W. Ruch. 2002. Computers with a personality? lessons to be learned from studies of the psychology of humor. In Proceedings of the The April Fools Day Workshop on Computational Humour. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=W%2E+Ruch%2E+2002%2E+Computers+with+a+personality%3F+lessons+to+be+learned+from+studies+of+the+psychology+of+humor%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+The+April+Fools+Day+Workshop+on+Computational+Humour%2E)
13. O. Stock and C. Strapparava. 2003. Getting serious about the development of computational humour. In Proceedings of the 8 th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-03), Acapulco, Mexico. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=O%2E+Stock+and+C%2E+Strapparava%2E+2003%2E+Getting+serious+about+the+development+of+computational+humour%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+8+th+International+Joint+Conference+on+Artificial+Intelligence+%28IJCAI%2D03%29%2C+Acapu)
14. O. Stock, C. Strapparava, and A. Nijholt, editors. 2002. Proceedings of the The April Fools Day Workshop on Computational Humour, Trento. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=O%2E+Stock%2C+C%2E+Strapparava%2C+and+A%2E+Nijholt%2C+editors%2E+2002%2E+Proceedings+of+the+The+April+Fools+Day+Workshop+on+Computational+Humour%2C+Trento%2E)
15. J. Taylor and L. Mazlack. 2004. Computationally recognizing wordplay in jokes. In Proceedings of CogSci 2004, Chicago. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=J%2E+Taylor+and+L%2E+Mazlack%2E+2004%2E+Computationally+recognizing+wordplay+in+jokes%2E+In+Proceedings+of+CogSci+2004%2C+Chicago%2E)

*Updated 24 October 2026*