File size: 95,342 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 | {
"paper_id": "P06-1014",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:25:09.363765Z"
},
"title": "Meaningful Clustering of Senses Helps Boost Word Sense Disambiguation Performance",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Roberto",
"middle": [],
"last": "Navigli",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Universit\u00e0 di Roma \"La Sapienza\" Roma",
"location": {
"country": "Italy"
}
},
"email": "navigli@di.uniroma1.it"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Fine-grained sense distinctions are one of the major obstacles to successful Word Sense Disambiguation. In this paper, we present a method for reducing the granularity of the WordNet sense inventory based on the mapping to a manually crafted dictionary encoding sense hierarchies, namely the Oxford Dictionary of English. We assess the quality of the mapping and the induced clustering, and evaluate the performance of coarse WSD systems in the Senseval-3 English all-words task.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P06-1014",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Fine-grained sense distinctions are one of the major obstacles to successful Word Sense Disambiguation. In this paper, we present a method for reducing the granularity of the WordNet sense inventory based on the mapping to a manually crafted dictionary encoding sense hierarchies, namely the Oxford Dictionary of English. We assess the quality of the mapping and the induced clustering, and evaluate the performance of coarse WSD systems in the Senseval-3 English all-words task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) is undoubtedly one of the hardest tasks in the field of Natural Language Processing. Even though some recent studies report benefits in the use of WSD in specific applications (e.g. Vickrey et al. (2005) and Stokoe (2005) ), the present performance of the best ranking WSD systems does not provide a sufficient degree of accuracy to enable real-world, language-aware applications.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 214,
"end": 235,
"text": "Vickrey et al. (2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
},
{
"start": 240,
"end": 253,
"text": "Stokoe (2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Most of the disambiguation approaches adopt the WordNet dictionary (Fellbaum, 1998) as a sense inventory, thanks to its free availability, wide coverage, and existence of a number of standard test sets based on it. Unfortunately, WordNet is a fine-grained resource, encoding sense distinctions that are often difficult to recognize even for human annotators (Edmonds and Kilgariff, 1998) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 67,
"end": 83,
"text": "(Fellbaum, 1998)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 358,
"end": 387,
"text": "(Edmonds and Kilgariff, 1998)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Recent estimations of the inter-annotator agreement when using the WordNet inventory report figures of 72.5% agreement in the preparation of the English all-words test set at Senseval-3 (Snyder and Palmer, 2004) and 67.3% on the Open Mind Word Expert annotation exercise (Chklovski and Mihalcea, 2002) . These numbers lead us to believe that a credible upper bound for unrestricted fine-grained WSD is around 70%, a figure that state-of-the-art automatic systems find it difficult to outperform. Furthermore, even if a system were able to exceed such an upper bound, it would be unclear how to interpret such a result.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 175,
"end": 211,
"text": "Senseval-3 (Snyder and Palmer, 2004)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 271,
"end": 301,
"text": "(Chklovski and Mihalcea, 2002)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "It seems therefore that the major obstacle to effective WSD is the fine granularity of the Word-Net sense inventory, rather than the performance of the best disambiguation systems. Interestingly, Ng et al. (1999) show that, when a coarse-grained sense inventory is adopted, the increase in interannotator agreement is much higher than the reduction of the polysemy degree.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 181,
"end": 212,
"text": "Interestingly, Ng et al. (1999)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Following these observations, the main question that we tackle in this paper is: can we produce and evaluate coarse-grained sense distinctions and show that they help boost disambiguation on standard test sets? We believe that this is a crucial research topic in the field of WSD, that could potentially benefit several application areas.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "The contribution of this paper is two-fold. First, we provide a wide-coverage method for clustering WordNet senses via a mapping to a coarse-grained sense inventory, namely the Oxford Dictionary of English (Soanes and Stevenson, 2003) (Section 2) . We show that this method is well-founded and accurate with respect to manually-made clusterings (Section 3). Second, we evaluate the performance of WSD systems when using coarse-grained sense inventories (Section 4). We conclude the paper with an account of related work (Section 5), and some final remarks (Section 6).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 206,
"end": 234,
"text": "(Soanes and Stevenson, 2003)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 235,
"end": 246,
"text": "(Section 2)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this section, we present an approach to the automatic construction of a coarse-grained sense inventory based on the mapping of WordNet senses to coarse senses in the Oxford Dictionary of English. In section 2.1, we introduce the two dictionaries, in Section 2.2 we illustrate the creation of sense descriptions from both resources, while in Section 2.3 we describe a lexical and a semantic method for mapping sense descriptions of Word-Net senses to ODE coarse entries.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Producing a Coarse-Grained Sense Inventory",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "WordNet (Fellbaum, 1998 ) is a computational lexicon of English which encodes concepts as synonym sets (synsets), according to psycholinguistic principles. For each word sense, WordNet provides a gloss (i.e. a textual definition) and a set of relations such as hypernymy (e.g. apple kind-of edible fruit), meronymy (e.g. computer has-part CPU), etc. The Oxford Dictionary of English (ODE) (Soanes and Stevenson, 2003) 1 provides a hierarchical structure of senses, distinguishing between homonymy (i.e. completely distinct senses, like race as a competition and race as a taxonomic group) and polysemy (e.g. race as a channel and as a current). Each polysemous sense is further divided into a core sense and a set of subsenses. For each sense (both core and subsenses), the ODE provides a textual definition, and possibly hypernyms and domain labels. Excluding monosemous senses, the ODE has an average number of 2.56 senses per word compared to the average polysemy of 3.21 in WordNet on the same words (with peaks for verbs of 2.73 and 3.75 senses, respectively).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 8,
"end": 23,
"text": "(Fellbaum, 1998",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Dictionaries",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "In Table 1 we show an excerpt of the sense inventories of the noun race as provided by both dictionaries 2 . The ODE identifies 3 homonyms and 3 polysemous senses for the first homonym, while WordNet encodes a flat list of 6 senses, some of which strongly related (e.g. race#1 and race#3). Also, the ODE provides a sense (ginger root) which is not taken into account in WordNet.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 3,
"end": 10,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Dictionaries",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "The structure of the ODE senses is clearly hierarchical: if we were able to map with a high accuracy WordNet senses to ODE entries, then a sense clustering could be trivially induced from the mapping. As a result, the granularity of the WordNet inventory would be drastically reduced. Furthermore, disregarding errors, the clustering would be well-founded, as the ODE sense groupings were manually crafted by expert lexicographers. In the next section we illustrate a general way of constructing sense descriptions that we use for determining a complete, automatic mapping between the two dictionaries.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Dictionaries",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "For each word w, and for each sense S of w in a given dictionary D \u2208 {WORDNET, ODE}, we construct a sense description d D (S) as a bag of words:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "d D (S) = def D (S) \u222a hyper D (S) \u222a domains D (S)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "where:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 def D (S) is the set of words in the textual definition of S (excluding usage examples), automatically lemmatized and partof-speech tagged with the RASP statistical parser (Briscoe and Carroll, 2002) ; \u2022 hyper D (S) is the set of direct hypernyms of S in the taxonomy hierarchy of D (\u2205 if hypernymy is not available); \u2022 domains D (S) includes the set of domain labels possibly assigned to sense S (\u2205 when no domain is assigned).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 174,
"end": 201,
"text": "(Briscoe and Carroll, 2002)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "Specifically, in the case of WordNet, we generate def WN (S) from the gloss of S, hyper WN (S) from the noun and verb taxonomy, and domains WN (S) from the subject field codes, i.e. domain labels produced semi-automatically by Magnini and Cavagli\u00e0 (2000) for each Word-Net synset (we exclude the general-purpose label, called FACTOTUM).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 227,
"end": 254,
"text": "Magnini and Cavagli\u00e0 (2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "For example, for the first WordNet sense of race#n we obtain the following description:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "d WN (race#n#1) = {competition#n} \u222a {contest#n} \u222a {POLITICS#N, SPORT#N}",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "In the case of the ODE, def ODE (S) is generated from the definitions of the core sense and the subsenses of the entry S. Hypernymy (for nouns only) and domain labels, when available, are included in the respective sets hyper ODE (S) race#n (WordNet) #1 Any competition (\u2192 contest). #2 People who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock (\u2192 group). #3 A contest of speed (\u2192 contest). #4 The flow of air that is driven backwards by an aircraft propeller (\u2192 flow). #5 A taxonomic group that is a division of a species; usually arises as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species (\u2192 taxonomic group). #6 A canal for a current of water (\u2192 canal).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "race#n (ODE) #1.1 Core: SPORT A competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 RACING A series of such competitions for horses or dogs \u2022 A situation in which individuals or groups compete (\u2192 contest) \u2022 AS-TRONOMY The course of the sun or moon through the heavens (\u2192 trajectory). #1.2 Core: NAUTICAL A strong or rapid current (\u2192 flow). #1.3 Core: A groove, channel, or passage.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 MECHANICS A water channel \u2022 Smooth groove or guide for balls (\u2192 indentation, conduit) \u2022 FARMING Fenced passageway in a stockyard (\u2192 route) \u2022 TEXTILES The channel along which the shuttle moves. #2.1 Core: ANTHROPOLOGY Division of humankind (\u2192 ethnic group).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 The condition of belonging to a racial division or group \u2022 A group of people sharing the same culture, history, language \u2022 BIOLOGY A group of people descended from a common ancestor. #3.1 Core: BOTANY, FOOD A ginger root (\u2192 plant part).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "and domains ODE (S). For example, the first ODE sense of race#n is described as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "d ODE (race#n#1.1) = {competition#n, runner#n, horse#n, vehicle#n, . . . , heavens#n} \u222a {contest#n, trajectory#n} \u222a {SPORT#N, RACING#N, ASTRONOMY#N} Notice that, for every S, d D (S)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "is non-empty as a definition is always provided by both dictionaries. This approach to sense descriptions is general enough to be applicable to any other dictionary with similar characteristics (e.g. the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English in place of ODE).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constructing Sense Descriptions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "In order to produce a coarse-grained version of the WordNet inventory, we aim at defining an automatic mapping between WordNet and ODE, i.e. a function \u00b5 :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "Senses WN \u2192 Senses ODE \u222a { },",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "where Senses D is the set of senses in the dictionary D and is a special element assigned when no plausible option is available for mapping (e.g. when the ODE encodes no entry corresponding to a WordNet sense).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "Given a WordNet sense S \u2208 Senses WN (w) we definem(S), the best matching sense in the ODE, as:m (S) = arg max",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "S \u2208Senses ODE (w) match(S, S )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "where match :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "Senses WN \u00d7Senses ODE \u2192 [0, 1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "] is a function that measures the degree of matching between the sense descriptions of S and S . We define the mapping \u00b5 as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "\u00b5(S) = m(S) if match(S,m(S)) \u2265 \u03b8 otherwise",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "where \u03b8 is a threshold below which a matching between sense descriptions is considered unreliable. Finally, we define the clustering of senses c(w) of a word w as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "c(w) = {\u00b5 \u22121 (S ) : S \u2208 Senses ODE (w), \u00b5 \u22121 (S ) = \u2205} \u222a {{S} : S \u2208 Senses WN (w), \u00b5(S) = }",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "where \u00b5 \u22121 (S ) is the group of WordNet senses mapped to the same sense S of the ODE, while the second set includes singletons of WordNet senses for which no mapping can be provided according to the definition of \u00b5.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "For example, an ideal mapping between entries in Table 1 would be as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 49,
"end": 56,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "\u00b5(race#n#1) = race#n#1.1, \u00b5(race#n#2) = race#n#2.1, \u00b5(race#n#3) = race#n#1.1, \u00b5(race#n#5) = race#n#2.1, \u00b5(race#n#4) = race#n#1.2, \u00b5(race#n#6) = race#n#1.3, resulting in the following clustering: c(race#n) = {{race#n#1, race#n#3}, {race#n#2, race#n#5}, {race#n#4}, {race#n#6}}",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "In Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 we describe two different choices for the match function, respectively based on the use of lexical and semantic information.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Mapping Word Senses",
"sec_num": "2.3"
},
{
"text": "As a first approach, we adopted a purely lexical matching function based on the notion of lexical overlap (Lesk, 1986) . The function counts the number of lemmas that two sense descriptions of a word have in common (we neglect parts of speech), and is normalized by the minimum of the two description lengths:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 106,
"end": 118,
"text": "(Lesk, 1986)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexical matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.1"
},
{
"text": "match LESK (S, S ) = |d WN (S)\u2229d ODE (S )| min{|d WN (S)|,|d ODE (S )|}",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexical matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.1"
},
{
"text": "where S \u2208 Senses WN (w) and S \u2208 Senses ODE (w). For instance: match LESK (race#n#1, race#n#1.1) = 3 min{4,20} = 3 4 = 0.75 match LESK (race#n#2, race#n#1.1) = 1 8 = 0.125 Notice that unrelated senses can get a positive score because of an overlap of the sense descriptions. In the example, group#n, the hypernym of race#n#2, is also present in the definition of race#n#1.1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexical matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.1"
},
{
"text": "Unfortunately, the very same concept can be defined with entirely different words. To match definitions in a semantic manner we adopted a knowledge-based Word Sense Disambiguation algorithm, Structural Semantic Interconnections (SSI, Navigli and Velardi (2004) ).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 234,
"end": 260,
"text": "Navigli and Velardi (2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "SSI 3 exploits an extensive lexical knowledge base, built upon the WordNet lexicon and enriched with collocation information representing semantic relatedness between sense pairs. Collocations are acquired from existing resources (like the Oxford Collocations, the Longman Language Activator, collocation web sites, etc.). Each collocation is mapped to the WordNet sense inventory in a semi-automatic manner and transformed into a relatedness edge (Navigli and Velardi, 2005) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 448,
"end": 475,
"text": "(Navigli and Velardi, 2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "Given a word context",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "C = {w 1 , ..., w n }, SSI builds a graph G = (V, E) such that V = n i=1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "Senses WN (w i ) and (S, S ) \u2208 E if there is at least one semantic interconnection between S and S in the lexical knowledge base. A semantic interconnection pattern is a relevant sequence of edges selected according to a manually-created context-free grammar, i.e. a path connecting a pair of word senses, possibly including a number of intermediate concepts. The grammar consists of a small number of rules, inspired by the notion of lexical chains (Morris and Hirst, 1991) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 450,
"end": 474,
"text": "(Morris and Hirst, 1991)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "SSI performs disambiguation in an iterative fashion, by maintaining a set C of senses as a semantic context. Initially, C = V (the entire set of senses of words in C). At each step, for each sense S in C, the algorithm calculates a score of the degree of connectivity between S and the other senses in C:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "3 Available online from: http://lcl.di.uniroma1.it/ssi",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "Score SSI (S, C) = S \u2208C\\{S} i\u2208IC(S,S ) 1 length(i) S \u2208C\\{S} |IC(S,S )|",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "where IC(S, S ) is the set of interconnections between senses S and S . The contribution of a single interconnection is given by the reciprocal of its length, calculated as the number of edges connecting its ends. The overall degree of connectivity is then normalized by the number of contributing interconnections. The highest ranking sense S of word w is chosen and the senses of w are removed from the semantic context C. The algorithm terminates when either C = \u2205 or there is no sense such that its score exceeds a fixed threshold.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "Given a word w, semantic matching is performed in two steps. First, for each dictionary D \u2208 {WORDNET, ODE}, and for each sense S \u2208 Senses D (w), the sense description of S is disambiguated by applying SSI to d D (S). As a result, we obtain a semantic description as a bag of concepts d sem D (S). Notice that sense descriptions from both dictionaries are disambiguated with respect to the WordNet sense inventory.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "Second, given a WordNet sense S \u2208 Senses WN (w) and an ODE sense S \u2208 Senses ODE (w), we define match SSI (S, S ) as a function of the direct relations connecting senses in d sem WN (S) and d sem ODE (S ):",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "match SSI (S, S ) = |c\u2192c :c\u2208d sem WN (S),c \u2208d sem ODE (S )| |d sem WN (S)|\u2022|d sem ODE (S )|",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "where c \u2192 c denotes the existence of a relation edge in the lexical knowledge base between a concept c in the description of S and a concept c in the description of S . Edges include the WordNet relation set (synonymy, hypernymy, meronymy, antonymy, similarity, nominalization, etc.) and the relatedness edge mentioned above (we adopt only direct relations to maintain a high precision). For example, some of the relations found between concepts in d sem WN (race#n#3) and d sem ODE (race#n#1.1) are:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "race#n#3 relation race#n#1.1 speed#n#1 related\u2212to \u2212\u2192 vehicle#n#1 race#n#3 related\u2212to \u2212\u2192 compete#v#1 racing#n#1 kind\u2212of \u2212\u2192 sport#n#1 race#n#3 kind\u2212of \u2212\u2192 contest#n#1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "contributing to the final value of the function on the two senses: match SSI (race#n#3, race#n#1.1) = 0.41 Due to the normalization factor in the denominator, these values are generally low, but unrelated senses have values much closer to 0. We chose SSI for the semantic matching function as it has the best performance among untrained systems on unconstrained WSD (cf. Section 4.1).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic matching",
"sec_num": "2.3.2"
},
{
"text": "We evaluated the accuracy of the mapping produced with the lexical and semantic methods described in Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2, respectively. We produced a gold-standard data set by manually mapping 5,077 WordNet senses of 763 randomlyselected words to the respective ODE entries (distributed as follows: 466 nouns, 231 verbs, 50 adjectives, 16 adverbs). The data set was created by two annotators and included only polysemous words. These words had 2,600 senses in the ODE. Overall, 4,599 out of the 5,077 WordNet senses had a corresponding sense in ODE (i.e. the ODE covered 90.58% of the WordNet senses in the data set), while 2,053 out of the 2,600 ODE senses had an analogous entry in WordNet (i.e. WordNet covered 78.69% of the ODE senses). The WordNet clustering induced by the manual mapping was 49.85% of the original size and the average degree of polysemy decreased from 6.65 to 3.32.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The reliability of our data set is substantiated by a quantitative assessment: 548 WordNet senses of 60 words were mapped to ODE entries by both annotators, with a pairwise mapping agreement of 92.7%. The average Cohen's \u03ba agreement between the two annotators was 0.874.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "In Table 2 we report the precision and recall of the lexical and semantic functions in providing the appropriate association for the set of senses having a corresponding entry in ODE (i.e. excluding the cases where a sense was assigned by the manual annotators, cf. Section 2.3). We also report in the Table the accuracy of the two functions when we view the problem as a classification task: an automatic association is correct if it corresponds to the manual association provided by the annotators or if both assign no answer (equivalently, if both provide an label). All the differences between Lesk and SSI are statistically significant (p < 0.01).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 3,
"end": 10,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "As a second experiment, we used two information-theoretic measures, namely entropy and purity (Zhao and Karypis, 2004) , to compare an automatic clustering c(w) (i.e. the sense groups acquired for word w) with a manual clusterin\u011d c(w). The entropy quantifies the distribution of the senses of a group over manually-defined groups, while the purity measures the extent to which a group contains senses primarily from one manual group.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 94,
"end": 118,
"text": "(Zhao and Karypis, 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Given a word w, and a sense group G \u2208 c(w), the entropy of G is defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "H(G) = \u2212 1 log |\u0109(w)| \u011c \u2208\u0109(w) |\u011c\u2229G| |\u011c| log( |\u011c\u2229G| |\u011c| )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "i.e., the entropy 4 of the distribution of senses of group G over the groups of the manual clusterin\u011d c(w). The entropy of an entire clustering c(w) is defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Entropy(c(w)) = G\u2208c(w) |G| |Senses WN (w)| H(G)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "that is, the entropy of each group weighted by its size. The purity of a sense group G \u2208 c(w) is defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "P u(G) = 1 |G| max G\u2208\u0109(w) |\u011c \u2229 G|",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "i.e., the normalized size of the largest subset of G contained in a single group\u011c of the manual clustering. The overall purity of a clustering is obtained as a weighted sum of the individual cluster purities:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "P urity(c(w)) = G\u2208c(w) |G| |Senses WN (w)| P u(G)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "We calculated the entropy and purity of the clustering produced automatically with the lexical and the semantic method, when compared to the grouping induced by our manual mapping (ODE), and to the grouping manually produced for the English all-words task at Senseval-2 (3,499 senses of 403 nouns). We excluded from both gold standards words having a single cluster. The figures are shown in Table 3 (good entropy and purity values should be close to 0 and 1 respectively). Table 3 shows that the quality of the clustering induced with a semantic function outperforms both lexical overlap and a random baseline. The baseline was computed averaging among 200 random clustering solutions for each word. Random clusterings were the result of a random mapping function between WordNet and ODE senses. As expected, the automatic clusterings have a lower purity when compared to the Senseval-2 noun grouping as the granularity of the latter is much finer than ODE (entropy is only partially affected by this difference, indicating that we are producing larger groups). Indeed, our gold standard (ODE), when compared to the Senseval groupings, obtains a low purity as well (0.75) and an entropy of 0.13.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 392,
"end": 399,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
},
{
"start": 474,
"end": 481,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating the Clustering",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The main reason for building a clustering of Word-Net senses is to make Word Sense Disambiguation a feasible task, thus overcoming the obstacles that even humans encounter when annotating sentences with excessively fine-grained word senses. As the semantic method outperformed the lexical overlap in the evaluations of previous Section, we decided to acquire a clustering on the entire WordNet sense inventory using this approach. As a result, we obtained a reduction of 33.54% in the number of entries (from 60,302 to 40,079 senses) and a decrease of the polysemy degree from 3.14 to 2.09. These figures exclude monosemous senses and derivatives in WordNet. As we are experimenting on an automaticallyacquired clustering, all the figures are affected by the 22.06% error rate resulting from Table 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluating Coarse-Grained WSD",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "As a first experiment, we assessed the effect of the automatic sense clustering on the English allwords task at Senseval-3 (Snyder and Palmer, 2004) . This task required WSD systems to provide a sense choice for 2,081 content words in a set of 301 sentences from the fiction, news story, and editorial domains.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 123,
"end": 148,
"text": "(Snyder and Palmer, 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We considered the three best-ranking WSD systems -GAMBL (Decadt et al., 2004) , Sense-Learner (Mihalcea and Faruque, 2004) , and Koc University (Yuret, 2004) -and the best unsupervised system, namely IRST-DDD (Strapparava et al., 2004) . We also included SSI as it outperforms all the untrained systems (Navigli and Velardi, 2005) . To evaluate the performance of the five systems on our coarse clustering, we considered a fine-grained answer to be correct if it belongs to the same cluster as that of the correct answer. Table 4 reports the performance of the systems, together with the first sense and the random baseline (in the last column we report the performance on the original fine-grained test set).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 56,
"end": 77,
"text": "(Decadt et al., 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 94,
"end": 122,
"text": "(Mihalcea and Faruque, 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 144,
"end": 157,
"text": "(Yuret, 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
},
{
"start": 209,
"end": 235,
"text": "(Strapparava et al., 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 303,
"end": 330,
"text": "(Navigli and Velardi, 2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 522,
"end": 529,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "The best system, Gambl, obtains almost 78% precision and recall, an interesting figure compared to 65% performance in the fine-grained WSD task. An interesting aspect is that the ranking across systems was maintained when moving from a fine-grained to a coarse-grained sense inventory, although two systems (SSI and IRST-DDD) show the best improvement.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "In order to show that the general improvement is the result of an appropriate clustering, we assessed the performance of Gambl by averaging its results when using 100 randomly-generated different clusterings. We excluded monosemous clusters from the test set (i.e. words with all the senses mapped to the same ODE entry), so as to clarify the real impact of properly grouped clusters. As a result, the random setting obtained 64.56% average accuracy, while the performance when adopting our automatic clustering was 70.84% (1,025/1,447 items).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "To make it clear that the performance improvement is not only due to polysemy reduction, we considered a subset of the Senseval-3 test set including only the incorrect answers given by the fine-grained version of Gambl (623 items). In other words, on this data set Gambl performs with 0% accuracy. We compared the performance of Gambl when adopting our automatic clustering with the accuracy of the random baseline. The results were respectively 34% and 15.32% accuracy. These experiments prove that the performance in Table 4 is not due to chance, but to an effective way of clustering word senses. Furthermore, the systems in the Table are not taking advantage of the information given by the clustering (trained systems could be retrained on the coarse clustering). To assess this aspect, we performed a further experiment. We modified the sense inventory of the SSI lexical knowledge base by adopting the coarse inventory acquired automatically. To this end, we merged the semantic interconnections belonging to the same cluster. We also disabled the first sense baseline heuristic, that most of the systems use as a back-off when they have no information about the word at hand. We call this new setting SSI * (as opposed to SSI used in Table 4 ).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 519,
"end": 526,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
},
{
"start": 632,
"end": 641,
"text": "Table are",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1242,
"end": 1249,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "In Table 5 we report the results. The algorithm obtains an improvement of 9.8% recall and 3.1% precision (both statistically significant, p < 0.05). The increase in recall is mostly due to the fact that different senses belonging to the same cluster now contribute together to the choice of that cluster (rather than individually to the choice of a fine-grained sense). Dolan (1994) describes a method for clustering word senses with the use of information provided in the electronic version of LDOCE (textual definitions, semantic relations, domain labels, etc.). Unfortunately, the approach is not described in detail and no evaluation is provided.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 370,
"end": 382,
"text": "Dolan (1994)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 3,
"end": 10,
"text": "Table 5",
"ref_id": "TABREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments on Senseval-3",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Most of the approaches in the literature make use of the WordNet structure to cluster its senses. Peters et al. (1998) exploit specific patterns in the WordNet hierarchy (e.g. sisters, autohyponymy, twins, etc.) to group word senses. They study semantic regularities or generalizations obtained and analyze the effect of clustering on the compatibility of language-specific wordnets. Mihalcea and Moldovan (2001) study the structure of WordNet for the identification of sense regularities: to this end, they provide a set of semantic and probabilistic rules. An evaluation of the heuristics provided leads to a polysemy reduction of 39% and an error rate of 5.6%. A different principle for clustering WordNet senses, based on the Minimum Description Length, is described by Tomuro (2001) . The clustering is evaluated against WordNet cousins and used for the study of inter-annotator disagreement. Another approach exploits the (dis)agreements of human annotators to derive coarse-grained sense clusters (Chklovski and Mihalcea, 2003) , where sense similarity is computed from confusion matrices. Agirre and Lopez (2003) analyze a set of methods to cluster WordNet senses based on the use of confusion matrices from the results of WSD systems, translation equivalences, and topic signatures (word co-occurrences extracted from the web). They assess the acquired clusterings against 20 words from the Senseval-2 sense groupings.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 98,
"end": 118,
"text": "Peters et al. (1998)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 774,
"end": 787,
"text": "Tomuro (2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 1004,
"end": 1034,
"text": "(Chklovski and Mihalcea, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 1097,
"end": 1120,
"text": "Agirre and Lopez (2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Finally, McCarthy (2006) proposes the use of ranked lists, based on distributionally nearest neighbours, to relate word senses. This softer notion of sense relatedness allows to adopt the most appropriate granularity for a specific application.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 9,
"end": 24,
"text": "McCarthy (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Compared to our approach, most of these methods do not evaluate the clustering produced with respect to a gold-standard clustering. Indeed, such an evaluation would be difficult and timeconsuming without a coarse sense inventory like that of ODE. A limited assessment of coarse WSD is performed by Fellbaum et al. (2001) , who obtain a large improvement in the accuracy of a maximum-entropy system on clustered verbs.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 298,
"end": 320,
"text": "Fellbaum et al. (2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we presented a study on the construction of a coarse sense inventory for the WordNet lexicon and its effects on unrestricted WSD.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "A key feature in our approach is the use of a well-established dictionary encoding sense hierarchies. As remarked in Section 2.2, the method can employ any dictionary with a sufficiently structured inventory of senses, and can thus be applied to reduce the granularity of, e.g., wordnets of other languages. One could argue that the adoption of the ODE as a sense inventory for WSD would be a better solution. While we are not against this possibility, there are problems that cannot be solved at present: the ODE does not encode semantic re-lations and is not freely available. Also, most of the present research and standard data sets focus on WordNet.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "The fine granularity of the WordNet sense inventory is unsuitable for most applications, thus constituting an obstacle that must be overcome. We believe that the research topic analyzed in this paper is a first step towards making WSD a feasible task and enabling language-aware applications, like information retrieval, question answering, machine translation, etc. In a future work, we plan to investigate the contribution of coarse disambiguation to such real-world applications. To this end, we aim to set up an Open Mind-like experiment for the validation of the entire mapping from WordNet to ODE, so that only a minimal error rate would affect the experiments to come.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "Finally, the method presented here could be useful for lexicographers in the comparison of the quality of dictionaries, and in the detection of missing word senses.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "The ODE was kindly made available by Ken Litkowski (CL Research) in the context of a license agreement.2 In the following, we denote a WordNet sense with the convention w#p#i where w is a word, p a part of speech and i is a sense number; analogously, we denote an ODE sense with the convention w#p#h.k where h is the homonym number and k is the k-th polysemous entry under homonym h.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Notice that we are comparing clusterings against the manual clustering (rather than viceversa), as otherwise a completely unclustered solution would result in 1.0 entropy and 0.0 purity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "This work is partially funded by the Interop NoE (508011), 6 th European Union FP. We wish to thank Paola Velardi, Mirella Lapata and Samuel Brody for their useful comments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Clustering wordnet word senses",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Eneko",
"middle": [],
"last": "Agirre",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Oier",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lopez",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Proc. of Conf. on Recent Advances on Natural Language (RANLP)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Eneko Agirre and Oier Lopez. 2003. Clustering wordnet word senses. In Proc. of Conf. on Recent Advances on Natural Language (RANLP). Borovets, Bulgary.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Robust accurate statistical annotation of general text",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ted",
"middle": [],
"last": "Briscoe",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [],
"last": "Carroll",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proc. of 3 rd Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ted Briscoe and John Carroll. 2002. Robust accurate sta- tistical annotation of general text. In Proc. of 3 rd Confer- ence on Language Resources and Evaluation. Las Palmas, Gran Canaria.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Building a sense tagged corpus with open mind word expert",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tim",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chklovski",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Rada",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mihalcea",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL 2002 Workshop on WSD: Recent Successes and Future Directions",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tim Chklovski and Rada Mihalcea. 2002. Building a sense tagged corpus with open mind word expert. In Proc. of ACL 2002 Workshop on WSD: Recent Successes and Fu- ture Directions. Philadelphia, PA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Exploiting agreement and disagreement of human annotators for word sense disambiguation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tim",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chklovski",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Rada",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mihalcea",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Proc. of Recent Advances In NLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tim Chklovski and Rada Mihalcea. 2003. Exploiting agree- ment and disagreement of human annotators for word sense disambiguation. In Proc. of Recent Advances In NLP (RANLP 2003). Borovetz, Bulgaria.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Gambl, genetic algorithm optimization of memory-based wsd",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Bart",
"middle": [],
"last": "Decadt",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V\u00e9ronique",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hoste",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Walter",
"middle": [],
"last": "Daelemans",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Antal",
"middle": [],
"last": "Van Den",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bosch",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Bart Decadt, V\u00e9ronique Hoste, Walter Daelemans, and Antal van den Bosch. 2004. Gambl, genetic algorithm opti- mization of memory-based wsd. In Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3. Barcelona, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Word sense ambiguation: Clustering related senses",
"authors": [
{
"first": "William",
"middle": [
"B"
],
"last": "Dolan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "Proc. of 15th Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "William B. Dolan. 1994. Word sense ambiguation: Cluster- ing related senses. In Proc. of 15th Conference on Com- putational Linguistics (COLING). Morristown, N.J.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Introduction to the special issue on evaluating word sense disambiguation systems",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Philip",
"middle": [],
"last": "Edmonds",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Adam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kilgariff",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "Journal of Natural Language Engineering",
"volume": "8",
"issue": "4",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Philip Edmonds and Adam Kilgariff. 1998. Introduction to the special issue on evaluating word sense disambiguation systems. Journal of Natural Language Engineering, 8(4).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Manual and automatic semantic annotation with wordnet",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Christiane",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fellbaum",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Martha",
"middle": [],
"last": "Palmer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hoa",
"middle": [
"Trang"
],
"last": "Dang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lauren",
"middle": [],
"last": "Delfs",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Susanne",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wolf",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proc. of NAACL Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Resources",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Christiane Fellbaum, Martha Palmer, Hoa Trang Dang, Lau- ren Delfs, and Susanne Wolf. 2001. Manual and au- tomatic semantic annotation with wordnet. In Proc. of NAACL Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Re- sources. Pittsburgh, PA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "WordNet: an Electronic Lexical Database",
"authors": [],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Christiane Fellbaum, editor. 1998. WordNet: an Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries: how to tell a pine code from an ice cream cone",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lesk",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Proc. of 5 th Conf. on Systems Documentation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michael Lesk. 1986. Automatic sense disambiguation us- ing machine readable dictionaries: how to tell a pine code from an ice cream cone. In Proc. of 5 th Conf. on Systems Documentation. ACM Press.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Integrating subject field codes into wordnet",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Bernardo",
"middle": [],
"last": "Magnini",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Gabriela",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cavagli\u00e0",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proc. of the 2 nd Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Bernardo Magnini and Gabriela Cavagli\u00e0. 2000. Integrating subject field codes into wordnet. In Proc. of the 2 nd Con- ference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Relating wordnet senses for word sense disambiguation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Diana",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mccarthy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL Workshop on Making Sense of Sense",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Diana McCarthy. 2006. Relating wordnet senses for word sense disambiguation. In Proc. of ACL Workshop on Mak- ing Sense of Sense. Trento, Italy.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Senselearner: Minimally supervised word sense disambiguation for all words in open text",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Rada",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mihalcea",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ehsanul",
"middle": [],
"last": "Faruque",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Rada Mihalcea and Ehsanul Faruque. 2004. Senselearner: Minimally supervised word sense disambiguation for all words in open text. In Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3. Barcelona, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Automatic generation of a coarse grained wordnet",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Rada",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mihalcea",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Moldovan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proc. of NAACL Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Resources",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Rada Mihalcea and Dan Moldovan. 2001. Automatic generation of a coarse grained wordnet. In Proc. of NAACL Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Re- sources. Pittsburgh, PA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Lexical cohesion computed by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jane",
"middle": [],
"last": "Morris",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Graeme",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hirst",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1991,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jane Morris and Graeme Hirst. 1991. Lexical cohesion com- puted by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text. Computational Linguistics, 17(1).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Learning domain ontologies from document warehouses and dedicated websites",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Roberto",
"middle": [],
"last": "Navigli",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Paola",
"middle": [],
"last": "Velardi",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Roberto Navigli and Paola Velardi. 2004. Learning domain ontologies from document warehouses and dedicated web- sites. Computational Linguistics, 30(2).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Structural semantic interconnections: a knowledge-based approach to word sense disambiguation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Roberto",
"middle": [],
"last": "Navigli",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Paola",
"middle": [],
"last": "Velardi",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Roberto Navigli and Paola Velardi. 2005. Structural se- mantic interconnections: a knowledge-based approach to word sense disambiguation. IEEE Transactions on Pat- tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), 27(7).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "A case study on the inter-annotator agreement for word sense disambiguation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hwee",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Chung",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Ng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Shou",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Lim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Foo",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1999,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL Workshop: Standardizing Lexical Resources",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hwee T. Ng, Chung Y. Lim, and Shou K. Foo. 1999. A case study on the inter-annotator agreement for word sense dis- ambiguation. In Proc. of ACL Workshop: Standardizing Lexical Resources. College Park, Maryland.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "Automatic sense clustering in eurowordnet",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Wim",
"middle": [],
"last": "Peters",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ivonne",
"middle": [],
"last": "Peters",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Piek",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vossen",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "Proc. of the 1 st Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Wim Peters, Ivonne Peters, and Piek Vossen. 1998. Au- tomatic sense clustering in eurowordnet. In Proc. of the 1 st Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC). Granada, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "The english all-words task",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Benjamin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Snyder",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Martha",
"middle": [],
"last": "Palmer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL 2004 SENSEVAL-3 Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Benjamin Snyder and Martha Palmer. 2004. The english all-words task. In Proc. of ACL 2004 SENSEVAL-3 Work- shop. Barcelona, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Oxford Dictionary of English",
"authors": [],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson, editors. 2003. Ox- ford Dictionary of English. Oxford University Press.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Differentiating homonymy and polysemy in information retrieval",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stokoe",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proc. of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Christopher Stokoe. 2005. Differentiating homonymy and polysemy in information retrieval. In Proc. of the Confer- ence on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Process- ing. Vancouver, Canada.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "Pattern abstraction and term similarity for word sense disambiguation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Carlo",
"middle": [],
"last": "Strapparava",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alfio",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gliozzo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Claudio",
"middle": [],
"last": "Giuliano",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Carlo Strapparava, Alfio Gliozzo, and Claudio Giuliano. 2004. Pattern abstraction and term similarity for word sense disambiguation. In Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval- 3. Barcelona, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "Tree-cut and a lexicon based on systematic polysemy",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Noriko",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tomuro",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proc. of the Meeting of the NAACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Noriko Tomuro. 2001. Tree-cut and a lexicon based on sys- tematic polysemy. In Proc. of the Meeting of the NAACL. Pittsburgh, USA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "Word sense disambiguation vs. statistical machine translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vickrey",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Luke",
"middle": [],
"last": "Biewald",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Marc",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teyssier",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Daphne",
"middle": [],
"last": "Koller",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proc. of Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David Vickrey, Luke Biewald, Marc Teyssier, and Daphne Koller. 2005. Word sense disambiguation vs. statistical machine translation. In Proc. of Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing. Vancouver, Canada.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Some experiments with a naive bayes wsd system",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Deniz",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yuret",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Deniz Yuret. 2004. Some experiments with a naive bayes wsd system. In Proc. of ACL/SIGLEX Senseval-3. Barcelona, Spain.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF27": {
"ref_id": "b27",
"title": "Empirical and theoretical comparisons of selected criterion functions for document clustering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ying",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhao",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "George",
"middle": [],
"last": "Karypis",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Machine Learning",
"volume": "",
"issue": "3",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ying Zhao and George Karypis. 2004. Empirical and theo- retical comparisons of selected criterion functions for doc- ument clustering. Machine Learning, 55(3).",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"TABREF0": {
"text": "The sense inventory of race#n in WordNet and ODE (definitions are abridged, bullets (\u2022) indicate a subsense in the ODE, arrows (\u2192) indicate hypernymy, DOMAIN LABELS are in small caps).",
"html": null,
"content": "<table/>",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF1": {
"text": "Performance of the lexical and semantic mapping functions.",
"html": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td>Func.</td><td>Prec.</td><td>Recall</td><td>F1</td><td>Acc.</td></tr><tr><td>Lesk</td><td colspan=\"4\">84.74% 65.43% 73.84% 66.08%</td></tr><tr><td>SSI</td><td colspan=\"4\">86.87% 79.67% 83.11% 77.94%</td></tr></table>",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF2": {
"text": "Comparison with gold standards.",
"html": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Gold standard Method Entropy Purity</td></tr><tr><td>ODE</td><td>Lesk SSI</td><td>0.15 0.11</td><td>0.87 0.87</td></tr><tr><td/><td>Baseline</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.67</td></tr><tr><td>Senseval</td><td>Lesk SSI</td><td>0.17 0.16</td><td>0.71 0.69</td></tr><tr><td/><td>Baseline</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.57</td></tr></table>",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF3": {
"text": "Performance of WSD systems at Senseval-3 on coarse-grained sense inventories.",
"html": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td>System</td><td>Prec. Rec.</td><td>F1</td><td>F1 fine</td></tr><tr><td>Gambl</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.779 0.779 0.779 0.652</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">SenseLearner 0.769 0.769 0.769 0.646</td></tr><tr><td>KOC Univ.</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.768 0.768 0.768 0.641</td></tr><tr><td>SSI</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.758 0.758 0.758 0.612</td></tr><tr><td>IRST-DDD</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.721 0.719 0.720 0.583</td></tr><tr><td>FS baseline</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.769 0.769 0.769 0.624</td></tr><tr><td>Random BL</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.497 0.497 0.497 0.340</td></tr></table>",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table"
},
"TABREF4": {
"text": "Performance of SSI on coarse inventories (SSI * uses a coarse-grained knowledge base).",
"html": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td>System</td><td colspan=\"2\">Prec. Recall F1</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">SSI + baseline 0.758 0.758</td><td>0.758</td></tr><tr><td>SSI</td><td>0.717 0.576</td><td>0.639</td></tr><tr><td>SSI *</td><td>0.748 0.674</td><td>0.709</td></tr></table>",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table"
}
}
}
} |