I have a massive database that contains 1) abstracts of journal articles about ethics and moral philosophy, 2) the date that each abstract was published, and 3) the number of times that each abstract has been downloaded each month since it was first published.:
- abstracts of journal articles about ethics and moral philosophy,
- the date that each abstract was published, and
- the number of times that each abstract has been downloaded each month since it was first published.
I want use this data to train an algorithm that will predict the number of times that a new abstract will be downloaded per month based upon the text of the new abstract.
I write code regularly, primarily in pythonPython, but I am new to machine learning and I am having trouble figuring out how to approach this project. From my preliminary research, I believe that this is a problem best addressed by a supervised learning method. There are many supervised learning methods, for example, those included in the scikit-learn package (http://scikitthose included in the scikit-learn.org/stable/supervised_learning.html#supervised-learning package). I don't know how to go about assessing which method would be the best to use for my specific project.
What is the best statistical or machine learning approach to this problem, or, what steps can I take to determine what the best approach is?
This is an example abstract from the database;database:
"For millennia, philosophers have speculated about the origins of ethics. Recent research in evolutionary psychology and the neurosciences has shed light on that question. But this research also has normative significance. A standard way of arguing against a normative ethical theory is to show that in some circumstances the theory leads to judgments that are contrary to our common moral intuitions. If, however, these moral intuitions are the biological residue of our evolutionary history, it is not clear why we should regard them as having any normative force. Research in the neurosciences should therefore lead us to reconsider the role of intuitions in normative ethics."
For millennia, philosophers have speculated about the origins of ethics. Recent research in evolutionary psychology and the neurosciences has shed light on that question. But this research also has normative significance. A standard way of arguing against a normative ethical theory is to show that in some circumstances the theory leads to judgments that are contrary to our common moral intuitions. If, however, these moral intuitions are the biological residue of our evolutionary history, it is not clear why we should regard them as having any normative force. Research in the neurosciences should therefore lead us to reconsider the role of intuitions in normative ethics.