What are meta elements of language for specifying NLP features?
Analysis Unit (AU) (Corpus level, Document level, Para (paragraph) level,  Sentence level);
Syntactic Unit (SU) (Word, Phrase, N-gram, Regex, POS Regex,);
LOGICAL (AND, OR, AND NOT,  OR NOT);
Normalize Morphosyntactic Variants (yes or no).
While designing machine learning based text analytics applications, often, NLP data scientists manually determine which NLP features to use based upon their knowledge and experience with related problems. This results in increased efforts during feature engineering process and renders automated reuse of features across semantically related applications inherently difficult. In this paper, we argue for standardization in feature specification by outlining structure of a language for specifying NLP features and present an approach for their reuse across applications to increase likelihood of identifying optimal features.
For an ever increasing spectrum of applications (e.g., medical text analysis, opinion mining, sentiment analysis, social media text analysis, customer intelligence, fraud analytics etc.) mining and analysis of unstructured natural language text data is necessary BIBREF0, BIBREF1, BIBREF2. One of key challenge while designing such text analytics (TA) applications is to identify right set of features. For example, for text classification problem, different sets of features have been considered in different works (spanning a history of more than twenty years) including `bag of words', `bag of phrases', `bag of n-grams', `WordNet based word generalizations', and `word embeddings' BIBREF3, BIBREF4, BIBREF5, BIBREF6, BIBREF7. Even for recent end-to-end designs using deep neural networks, specification of core features remains manually driven BIBREF8, BIBREF9. During feature engineering, often data scientists manually determine which features to use based upon their experience and expertise with respect to the underlying application domain as well as state-of-the-art tools and techniques. Different tools (e.g., NLTK BIBREF10, Mallet BIBREF11, Stanford CoreNLP BIBREF12, Apache OpenNLP BIBREF13, Apache Lucene BIBREF14, etc.) available to a NLP data scientist for TA application design and development often differ in terms of support towards extraction of features, level of granularity at which feature extraction process is to be specified; and these tools often use different programing vocabularies to specify semantically equivalent features. Currently, there is no generic method or approach, which can be applied during TA application's design process to define and extract features for any arbitrary application in an automated or semi-automated manner. Even there is no single way to express wide range of NLP features, resulting into increased efforts during feature engineering which has to start new for each data scientist and automated reuse of features across semantically similar or related applications designed by different data scientists is difficult. This also hinders foundational studies on NLP feature engineering including why certain features are more critical than others. In this paper, we aim to present an approach towards automating NLP feature engineering. We start with an outline of a language for expressing NLP features abstracting over the feature extraction process, which often implicitly captures intent of the NLP data scientist to extract specific features from given input text. We next discuss a method to enable automated reuse of features across semantically related applications when a corpus of feature specifications for related applications is available. Proposed language and system would help achieving reduction in manual effort towards design and extraction of features, would ensure standardization in feature specification process, and could enable effective reuse of features across similar and/or related applications.