Abstract
Online discourse about urban issues - walkability, cycling infrastructure, public transit, housing density, and street safety - is voluminous but unstructured, and existing city-evaluation tools capture none of it. We present a pipeline and conversational system that combines geographic entity resolution, topic modeling, sentiment analysis, and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) over 22,788 chunks of YouTube transcripts and comments spanning 309 North American cities. Beyond the system itself, our contribution is a set of measurements about what happens when standard NLP components meet short, informal, geographically ambiguous text. A Twitter-tuned RoBERTa classifier outperforms a VADER lexicon baseline by 12.6 macro-F1 points (0.589 vs. 0.464; McNemar p = 0.0001), but both models collapse on the neutral class, which dominates urbanist comment traffic; annotators disagree on the same class (Cohen's kappa = 0.53). Dense retrieval beats a TF-IDF baseline at every cutoff (P@5 0.790 vs. 0.560), and video-level relevance proxies understate chunk-level precision by a wide margin (0.660 vs. 0.94 under human rating). For groundedness evaluation, we find BERTScore unusable when a multi-sentence generated summary is compared against a single short comment - scores are nearly flat regardless of relevance - and show that ROUGE-1-based groundedness is a paraphrase-driven lower bound rather than a hallucination rate. These findings generalize beyond the urbanist domain to any RAG system built over short user-generated documents.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22705
