File size: 103,048 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 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 | {
"paper_id": "P09-1012",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T08:53:18.733486Z"
},
"title": "Bayesian Unsupervised Word Segmentation with Nested Pitman-Yor Language Modeling",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Daichi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mochihashi",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": "daichi@cslab.kecl.ntt.co.jp"
},
{
"first": "Takeshi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yamada",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": "yamada@cslab.kecl.ntt.co.jp"
},
{
"first": "Naonori",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ueda",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": "ueda@cslab.kecl.ntt.co.jp"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "In this paper, we propose a new Bayesian model for fully unsupervised word segmentation and an efficient blocked Gibbs sampler combined with dynamic programming for inference. Our model is a nested hierarchical Pitman-Yor language model, where Pitman-Yor spelling model is embedded in the word model. We confirmed that it significantly outperforms previous reported results in both phonetic transcripts and standard datasets for Chinese and Japanese word segmentation. Our model is also considered as a way to construct an accurate word n-gram language model directly from characters of arbitrary language, without any \"word\" indications.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P09-1012",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "In this paper, we propose a new Bayesian model for fully unsupervised word segmentation and an efficient blocked Gibbs sampler combined with dynamic programming for inference. Our model is a nested hierarchical Pitman-Yor language model, where Pitman-Yor spelling model is embedded in the word model. We confirmed that it significantly outperforms previous reported results in both phonetic transcripts and standard datasets for Chinese and Japanese word segmentation. Our model is also considered as a way to construct an accurate word n-gram language model directly from characters of arbitrary language, without any \"word\" indications.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "\"Word\" is no trivial concept in many languages. Asian languages such as Chinese and Japanese have no explicit word boundaries, thus word segmentation is a crucial first step when processing them. Even in western languages, valid \"words\" are often not identical to space-separated tokens. For example, proper nouns such as \"United Kingdom\" or idiomatic phrases such as \"with respect to\" actually function as a single word, and we often condense them into the virtual words \"UK\" and \"w.r.t.\".",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In order to extract \"words\" from text streams, unsupervised word segmentation is an important research area because the criteria for creating supervised training data could be arbitrary, and will be suboptimal for applications that rely on segmentations. It is particularly difficult to create \"correct\" training data for speech transcripts, colloquial texts, and classics where segmentations are often ambiguous, let alone is impossible for unknown languages whose properties computational linguists might seek to uncover.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "From a scientific point of view, it is also interesting because it can shed light on how children learn \"words\" without the explicitly given boundaries for every word, which is assumed by supervised learning approaches.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Lately, model-based methods have been introduced for unsupervised segmentation, in particular those based on Dirichlet processes on words (Goldwater et al., 2006; Xu et al., 2008) . This maximizes the probability of word segmentation w given a string s :",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 138,
"end": 162,
"text": "(Goldwater et al., 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 163,
"end": 179,
"text": "Xu et al., 2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "w = argmax w p(w|s) .",
"eq_num": "(1)"
}
],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "This approach often implicitly includes heuristic criteria proposed so far 1 , while having a clear statistical semantics to find the most probable word segmentation that will maximize the probability of the data, here the strings. However, they are still na\u00efve with respect to word spellings, and the inference is very slow owing to inefficient Gibbs sampling. Crucially, since they rely on sampling a word boundary between two neighboring words, they can leverage only up to bigram word dependencies.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we extend this work to propose a more efficient and accurate unsupervised word segmentation that will optimize the performance of the word n-gram Pitman-Yor (i.e. Bayesian Kneser-Ney) language model, with an accurate character \u221e-gram Pitman-Yor spelling model embedded in word models.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Furthermore, it can be viewed as a method for building a high-performance n-gram language model directly from character strings of arbitrary language. It is carefully smoothed and has no \"unknown words\" problem, resulting from its model structure.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, (a) Generating n-gram distributions G hierarchically from the Pitman-Yor process. Here, n = 3.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "(b) Equivalent representation using a hierarchical Chinese Restaurant process. Each word in a training text is a \"customer\" shown in italic, and added to the leaf of its two words context. we briefly describe a language model based on the Pitman-Yor process (Teh, 2006b) , which is a generalization of the Dirichlet process used in previous research. By embedding a character n-gram in word n-gram from a Bayesian perspective, Section 3 introduces a novel language model for word segmentation, which we call the Nested Pitman-Yor language model. Section 4 describes an efficient blocked Gibbs sampler that leverages dynamic programming for inference. In Section 5 we describe experiments on the standard datasets in Chinese and Japanese in addition to English phonetic transcripts, and semi-supervised experiments are also explored. Section 6 is a discussion and Section 7 concludes the paper.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 258,
"end": 270,
"text": "(Teh, 2006b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "To compute a probability p(w|s) in (1), we adopt a Bayesian language model lately proposed by (Teh, 2006b; Goldwater et al., 2005 ) based on the Pitman-Yor process, a generalization of the Dirichlet process. As we shall see, this is a Bayesian theory of the best-performing Kneser-Ney smoothing of n-grams (Kneser and Ney, 1995) , allowing an integrated modeling from a Bayesian perspective as persued in this paper. The Pitman-Yor (PY) process is a stochastic process that generates discrete probability distribution G that is similar to another distribution G 0 , called a base measure. It is written as",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 94,
"end": 106,
"text": "(Teh, 2006b;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 107,
"end": 129,
"text": "Goldwater et al., 2005",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 306,
"end": 328,
"text": "(Kneser and Ney, 1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "G \u223c PY(G 0 , d, \u03b8) ,",
"eq_num": "(2)"
}
],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "where d is a discount factor and \u03b8 controls how similar G is to G 0 on average. Suppose we have a unigram word distribution",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "G 1 = { p(\u2022) } where \u2022 ranges over each word in the lexicon. The bigram distribution G 2 = { p(\u2022|v) }",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "given a word v is different from G 1 , but will be similar to G 1 especially for high frequency words. Therefore, we can generate G 2 from a PY process of base measure G 1 , as",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "G 2 \u223c PY(G 1 , d, \u03b8). Similarly, trigram distribution G 3 = { p(\u2022|v v) } given an additional word v is generated as G 3 \u223c PY(G 2 , d, \u03b8)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": ", and G 1 , G 2 , G 3 will form a tree structure shown in Figure 1(a) . In practice, we cannot observe G directly because it will be infinite dimensional distribution over the possible words, as we shall see in this paper. However, when we integrate out G it is known that Figure 1 (a) can be represented by an equivalent hierarchical Chinese Restaurant Process (CRP) (Aldous, 1985) as in Figure 1(b) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 368,
"end": 382,
"text": "(Aldous, 1985)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 58,
"end": 69,
"text": "Figure 1(a)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 273,
"end": 281,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 389,
"end": 400,
"text": "Figure 1(b)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In this representation, each n-gram context h (including the null context for unigrams) is a Chinese restaurant whose customers are the n-gram counts c(w|h) seated over the tables",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 t hw .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The seatings has been incrementally constructed by choosing the table k for each count in c(w|h) with probability proportional to",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "c hwk \u2212 d (k = 1, \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 , t hw ) \u03b8 + d\u2022t h\u2022 (k = new ) ,",
"eq_num": "(3)"
}
],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "where c hwk is the number of customers seated at table k thus far and t h\u2022 = w t hw is the total number of tables in h. When k = new is selected, t hw is incremented, and this means that the count was actually generated from the shorter context h . Therefore, in that case a proxy customer is sent to the parent restaurant and this process will recurse. For example, if we have a sentence \"she will sing\" in the training data for trigrams, we add each word \"she\" \"will\" \"sing\" \"$\" as a customer to its two preceding words context node, as described in Figure 1 (b). Here, \"$\" is a special token representing a sentence boundary in language model-ing (Brown et al., 1992) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 650,
"end": 670,
"text": "(Brown et al., 1992)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 552,
"end": 560,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "As a result, the n-gram probability of this hierarchical Pitman-Yor language model (HPYLM) is recursively computed as",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "p(w|h) = c(w|h)\u2212d\u2022t hw \u03b8+c(h) + \u03b8+d\u2022t h\u2022 \u03b8+c(h) p(w|h ),",
"eq_num": "(4)"
}
],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "where p(w|h ) is the same probability using a (n\u22121)-gram context h . When we set t hw \u2261 1, (4) recovers a Kneser-Ney smoothing: thus a HPYLM is a Bayesian Kneser-Ney language model as well as an extension of the hierarchical Dirichlet Process (HDP) used in Goldwater et al. (2006) . \u03b8, d are hyperparameters that can be learned as Gamma and Beta posteriors, respectively, given the data. For details, see Teh (2006a) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 257,
"end": 280,
"text": "Goldwater et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 405,
"end": 416,
"text": "Teh (2006a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The inference of this model interleaves adding and removing a customer to optimize t hw , d, and \u03b8 using MCMC. However, in our case \"words\" are not known a priori: the next section describes how to accomplish this by constructing a nested HPYLM of words and characters, with the associated inference algorithm.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Pitman-Yor process and n-gram models",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Thus far we have assumed that the unigram G 1 is already given, but of course it should also be generated as",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "G 1 \u223c PY(G 0 , d, \u03b8).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Here, a problem occurs: What should we use for G 0 , namely the prior probabilities over words 2 ? If a lexicon is finite, we can use a uniform prior G 0 (w) = 1/|V | for every word w in lexicon V . However, with word segmentation every substring could be a word, thus the lexicon is not limited but will be countably infinite.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Building an accurate G 0 is crucial for word segmentation, since it determines how the possible words will look like. Previous work using a Dirichlet process used a relatively simple prior for G 0 , namely an uniform distribution over characters (Goldwater et al., 2006) , or a prior solely dependent on word length with a Poisson distribution whose parameter is fixed by hand (Xu et al., 2008) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 246,
"end": 270,
"text": "(Goldwater et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 377,
"end": 394,
"text": "(Xu et al., 2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "In contrast, in this paper we use a simple but more elaborate model, that is, a character n-gram language model that also employs HPYLM. This is important because in English, for example, words are likely to end in '-tion' and begin with 're-', but almost never end in '-tio' nor begin with 'sre-' 3 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Therefore, we use",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "G 0 (w) = p(c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k ) (5) = k i=1 p(c i |c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c i\u22121 )",
"eq_num": "(6)"
}
],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "where string c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k is a spelling of w, and",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "p(c i |c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c i\u22121 )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "is given by the character HPYLM according to (4). This language model, which we call Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model (NPYLM) hereafter, is the hierarchical language model shown in Figure 2, where the character HPYLM is embedded as a base measure of the word HPYLM. 4 As the final base measure for the character HPYLM, we used a uniform prior over the possible characters of a given language. To avoid dependency on ngram order n, we actually used the \u221e-gram language model (Mochihashi and Sumita, 2007) , a variable order HPYLM, for characters. However, for generality we hereafter state that we used the HPYLM. The theory remains the same for \u221egrams, except sampling or marginalizing over n as needed.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 474,
"end": 503,
"text": "(Mochihashi and Sumita, 2007)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 181,
"end": 187,
"text": "Figure",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Furthermore, we corrected (5) so that word length will have a Poisson distribution whose parameter can now be estimated for a given language and word type. We describe this in detail in Section 4.3.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "In our NPYLM, the word model and the character model are not separate but connected through a nested CRP. When a word w is generated from its parent at the unigram node, it means that w is drawn from the base measure, namely a character HPYLM. Then we divide w into characters c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k to yield a \"sentence\" of characters and feed this into the character HPYLM as data.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Chinese Restaurant Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Conversely, when a table becomes empty, this means that the data associated with the table are no longer valid. Therefore we remove the corresponding customers from the character HPYLM using the inverse procedure of adding a customer in Section 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Chinese Restaurant Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "All these processes will be invoked when a string is segmented into \"words\" and customers are added to the leaves of the word HPYLM. To segment a string into \"words\", we used efficient dynamic programming combined with MCMC, as described in the next section.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Chinese Restaurant Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To find the hidden word segmentation w of a string",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Inference",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "s = c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c N ,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Inference",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "which is equivalent to the vector of binary hidden variables z = z 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 z N , the simplest approach is to build a Gibbs sampler that randomly selects a character c i and draw a binary decision z i as to whether there is a word boundary, and then update the language model according to the new segmentation (Goldwater et al., 2006; Xu et al., 2008) . When we iterate this procedure sufficiently long, it becomes a sample from the true distribution (1) (Gilks et al., 1996) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 309,
"end": 333,
"text": "(Goldwater et al., 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 334,
"end": 350,
"text": "Xu et al., 2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
},
{
"start": 454,
"end": 474,
"text": "(Gilks et al., 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Inference",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "However, this sampler is too inefficient since time series data such as word segmentation have a very high correlation between neighboring words. As a result, the sampler is extremely slow to converge. In fact, (Goldwater et al., 2006) reports that the sampler would not mix without annealing, and the experiments needed 20,000 times of sampling for every character in the training data.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 211,
"end": 235,
"text": "(Goldwater et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Inference",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "Furthermore, it has an inherent limitation that it cannot deal with larger than bigrams, because it uses only local statistics between directly contiguous words for word segmentation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Inference",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "Instead, we propose a sentence-wise Gibbs sampler of word segmentation using efficient dynamic programming, as shown in Figure 3 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 120,
"end": 128,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Blocked Gibbs sampler",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "In this algorithm, first we randomly select a string, and then remove the \"sentence\" data of its word segmentation from the NPYLM. Sampling a new segmentation, we update the NPYLM by adding a new \"sentence\" according to the new seg-",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Blocked Gibbs sampler",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "1: for j = 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 J do 2: for s in randperm (s 1 , \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 , s D ) do 3: if j > 1 then 4:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Blocked Gibbs sampler",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Remove customers of w(s) from \u0398 Sample hyperparameters of \u0398 10: end for Figure 3 : Blocked Gibbs Sampler of NPYLM \u0398.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 72,
"end": 80,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Blocked Gibbs sampler",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "mentation. When we repeat this process, it is expected to mix rapidly because it implicitly considers all possible segmentations of the given string at the same time. This is called a blocked Gibbs sampler that samples z block-wise for each sentence. It has an additional advantage in that we can accommodate higher-order relationships than bigrams, particularly trigrams, for word segmentation. 5",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Blocked Gibbs sampler",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Then, how can we sample a segmentation w for each string s? In accordance with the Forward filtering Backward sampling of HMM (Scott, 2002) , this is achieved by essentially the same algorithm employed to sample a PCFG parse tree within MCMC (Johnson et al., 2007) and grammar-based segmentation . Figure 4) . Segmentations before the final k characters are marginalized using the following recursive relationship:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 126,
"end": 139,
"text": "(Scott, 2002)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 242,
"end": 264,
"text": "(Johnson et al., 2007)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 298,
"end": 307,
"text": "Figure 4)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF5"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Forward-Backward inference",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "\u03b1[t][k] = t\u2212k j=1 p(c t t\u2212k+1 |c t\u2212k t\u2212k\u2212j+1 )\u2022\u03b1[t\u2212k][j] (7)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Forward-Backward inference",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "where ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Forward-Backward inference",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "for k = max(1, t\u2212L) to t do 3:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Forward-Backward inference",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Compute \u03b1[t][k] according to (7).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Forward-Backward inference",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "end for 5: end for 6: Initialize t \u2190 N , i \u2190 0, w 0 \u2190 $ 7: while t > 0 do 8:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Draw k \u221d p(w i |c t t\u2212k+1 , \u0398) \u2022 \u03b1[t][k] 9: Set w i \u2190 c t t\u2212k+1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "10:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Set t \u2190 t \u2212 k, i \u2190 i + 1 11: end while 12: word boundary for each t as q t , we can write",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Return w = w i , w i\u22121 , \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 , w 1 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "\u03b1[t][k] = p(c t 1 , q t = k) (8) = j p(c t 1 , q t = k, q t\u2212k = j) (9) = j p(c t\u2212k 1 , c t t\u2212k+1 , q t = k, q t\u2212k = j)(10) = j p(c t t\u2212k+1 |c t\u2212k 1 )p(c t\u2212k 1 , q t\u2212k = j)(11) = j p(c t t\u2212k+1 |c t\u2212k )\u03b1[t\u2212k][j] ,",
"eq_num": "(12)"
}
],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "where we used conditional independency of q t given q t\u2212k and uniform prior over q t in (11) above.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Backward Sampling. Once the probability table \u03b1[t][k] is obtained, we can sample a word segmentation backwards. Since \u03b1[N ][k] is a marginal probability of string c N 1 with the last k characters being a word, and there is always a sentence boundary token $ at the end of the string, with probability proportional to p",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "($|c N N \u2212k )\u2022\u03b1[N ][k]",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "we can sample k to choose the boundary of the final word. The second final word is similarly sampled using the probability of preceding the last word just sampled: we continue this process until we arrive at the beginning of the string (Figure 5 ).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 236,
"end": 245,
"text": "(Figure 5",
"ref_id": "FIGREF6"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Trigram case. For simplicity, we showed the algorithm for bigrams above. For trigrams, we maintain a forward variable \u03b1[t][k][j], which represents a marginal probability of string c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c t with both the final k characters and further j characters preceding it being words. Forward-Backward algorithm becomes complicated thus omitted, but can be derived following the extended algorithm for second order HMM (He, 1988) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 412,
"end": 422,
"text": "(He, 1988)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Complexity This algorithm has a complexity of O(N L 2 ) for bigrams and O(N L 3 ) for trigrams for each sentence, where N is the length of the sentence and L is the maximum allowed length of a word (\u2264 N ).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "As Nagata (1996) noted, when only (5) is used inadequately low probabilities are assigned to long words, because it has a largely exponential distribution over length. To correct this, we assume that word length k has a Poisson distribution with a mean \u03bb:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 3,
"end": 16,
"text": "Nagata (1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "Po(k|\u03bb) = e \u2212\u03bb \u03bb k k! .",
"eq_num": "(13)"
}
],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Since the appearance of c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k is equivalent to that of length k and the content, by making the character n-gram model explicit as \u0398 we can set",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "p(c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k ) = p(c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k , k) (14) = p(c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k , k|\u0398) p(k|\u0398) Po(k|\u03bb) (15)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "where",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "p(c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c k , k|\u0398)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "is an n-gram probability given by (6), and p(k|\u0398) is a probability that a word of length k will be generated from \u0398. While previous work used p(k|\u0398) = (1 \u2212 p($)) k\u22121 p($), this is only true for unigrams. Instead, we employed a Monte Carlo method that generates words randomly from \u0398 to obtain the empirical estimates of p(k|\u0398).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Estimating \u03bb. Of course, we do not leave \u03bb as a constant. Instead, we put a Gamma distribution",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "p(\u03bb) = Ga(a, b) = b a \u0393(a) \u03bb a\u22121 e \u2212b\u03bb",
"eq_num": "(16)"
}
],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "to estimate \u03bb from the data for given language and word type. 7 Here, \u0393(x) is a Gamma function and a, b are the hyperparameters chosen to give a nearly uniform prior distribution. 8",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Denoting W as a set of \"words\" obtained from word segmentation, the posterior distribution of \u03bb used for (13) is",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "p(\u03bb|W ) \u221d p(W |\u03bb)p(\u03bb) = Ga a+ w\u2208W t(w)|w|, b+ w\u2208W t(w) , (17)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "where t(w) is the number of times word w is generated from the character HPYLM, i.e. the number of tables t w for w in word unigrams. We sampled \u03bb from this posterior for each Gibbs iteration.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Poisson correction",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "To validate our model, we conducted experiments on standard datasets for Chinese and Japanese word segmentation that are publicly available, as well as the same dataset used in (Goldwater et al., 2006) . Note that NPYLM maximizes the probability of strings, equivalently, minimizes the perplexity per character. Therefore, the recovery of the \"ground truth\" that is not available for inference is a byproduct in unsupervised learning.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 177,
"end": 201,
"text": "(Goldwater et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Since our implementation is based on Unicode and learns all hyperparameters from the data, we also confirmed that NPYLM segments the Arabic Gigawords equally well.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "In order to directly compare with the previously reported result, we first used the same dataset as Goldwater et al. (2006) . This dataset consists of 9,790 English phonetic transcripts from CHILDES data (MacWhinney and Snow, 1985) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 100,
"end": 123,
"text": "Goldwater et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 204,
"end": 231,
"text": "(MacWhinney and Snow, 1985)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "English phonetic transcripts",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Since our algorithm converges rather fast, we ran the Gibbs sampler of trigram NPYLM for 200 iterations to obtain the results in Table 1 . Among the token precision (P), recall (R), and F-measure (F), the recall is especially higher to outperform the previous result based on HDP in F-measure. Meanwhile, the same measures over the obtained lexicon (LP, LR, LF) are not always improved. Moreover, the average length of words inferred was surprisingly similar to ground truth: 2.88, while the ground truth is 2.87. Table 2 shows the empirical computational time needed to obtain these results. Although the convergence in MCMC is not uniquely identified, improvement in efficiency is also outstanding.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 129,
"end": 136,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 514,
"end": 521,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "English phonetic transcripts",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "To show applicability beyond small phonetic transcripts, we used standard datasets for Chinese and Table 1 : Segmentation accuracies on English phonetic transcripts. NPY(n) means n-gram NPYLM. Results for HDP(2) are taken from , which corrects the errors in Goldwater et al. (2006) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 258,
"end": 281,
"text": "Goldwater et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 99,
"end": 106,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Chinese and Japanese word segmentation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "time iterations NPYLM 17min 200 HDP 10h 55min 20000 Table 2 : Computations needed for Table 1 . Iterations for \"HDP\" is the same as described in . Actually, NPYLM approximately converged around 50 iterations, 4 minutes.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 52,
"end": 59,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 86,
"end": 93,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Model",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Japanese word segmentation, with all supervised segmentations removed in advance.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Model",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Chinese For Chinese, we used a publicly available SIGHAN Bakeoff 2005 dataset (Emerson, 2005 . To compare with the latest unsupervised results (using a closed dataset of Bakeoff 2006), we chose the common sets prepared by Microsoft Research Asia (MSR) for simplified Chinese, and by City University of Hong Kong (CITYU) for traditional Chinese. We used a random subset of 50,000 sentences from each dataset for training, and the evaluation was conducted on the enclosed test data. 9",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 50,
"end": 69,
"text": "SIGHAN Bakeoff 2005",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 70,
"end": 92,
"text": "dataset (Emerson, 2005",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Model",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Japanese For Japanese, we used the Kyoto Corpus (Kyoto) (Kurohashi and Nagao, 1998) : we used random subset of 1,000 sentences for evaluation and the remaining 37,400 sentences for training. In all cases we removed all whitespaces to yield raw character strings for inference, and set L = 4 for Chinese and L = 8 for Japanese to run the Gibbs sampler for 400 iterations. The results (in token F-measures) are shown in Table 3 . Our NPYLM significantly ourperforms the best results using a heuristic approach reported in Zhao and Kit (2008) . While Japanese accuracies appear lower, subjective qualities are much higher. This is mostly because NPYLM segments inflectional suffixes and combines frequent proper names, which are inconsistent with the \"correct\" Model MSR CITYU Kyoto NPY(2) 80.2 (51.9) 82.4 (126.5) 62.1 (23.1) NPY(3) 80.7 (48.8) 81.7 (128.3) 66.6 (20.6) ZK08 66.7 (-) 69.2 (-) - Table 3 : Accuracies and perplexities per character (in parentheses) on actual corpora. \"ZK08\" are the best results reported in Zhao and Kit (2008) . We used \u221e-gram for characters. segmentations. Bigram and trigram performances are similar for Chinese, but trigram performs better for Japanese. In fact, although the difference in perplexity per character is not so large, the perplexity per word is radically reduced: 439.8 (bigram) to 190.1 (trigram). This is because trigram models can leverage complex dependencies over words to yield shorter words, resulting in better predictions and increased tokens.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 56,
"end": 83,
"text": "(Kurohashi and Nagao, 1998)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 520,
"end": 539,
"text": "Zhao and Kit (2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
},
{
"start": 1021,
"end": 1040,
"text": "Zhao and Kit (2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 418,
"end": 425,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 893,
"end": 900,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Model",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Furthermore, NPYLM is easily amenable to semi-supervised or even supervised learning. In that case, we have only to replace the word segmentation w(s) in Figure 3 to the supervised one, for all or part of the training data. Table 4 shows the results using 10,000 sentences (1/5) or complete supervision. Our completely generative model achieves the performance of 94% (Chinese) or even 97% (Japanese) in supervised case. The result also shows that the supervised segmentations are suboptimal with respect to the perplexity per character, and even worse than unsupervised results. In semi-supervised case, using only 10K reference segmentations gives a performance of around 90% accuracy and the lowest perplexity, thanks to a combination with unsupervised data in a principled fashion.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 154,
"end": 162,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 224,
"end": 231,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "MSR",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Our model is particularly effective for spoken transcripts, colloquial texts, classics, or unknown languages where supervised segmentation data is difficult or even impossible to create. For example, we are pleased to say that we can now analyze (and build a language model on) \"The Tale of Genji\", the core of Japanese classics written 1,000 years ago ( Figure 6 ). The inferred segmentations are Figure 6 : Unsupervised segmentation result for \"The Tale of Genji\". (16, 443 sentences, 899, 668 characters in total) mostly correct, with some inflectional suffixes being recognized as words, which is also the case with English. Finally, we note that our model is also effective for western languages: Figure 7 shows a training text of \"Alice in Wonderland \" with all whitespaces removed, and the segmentation result.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 459,
"end": 471,
"text": "Genji\". (16,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 472,
"end": 486,
"text": "443 sentences,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 487,
"end": 491,
"text": "899,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 492,
"end": 516,
"text": "668 characters in total)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 355,
"end": 363,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 398,
"end": 406,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 702,
"end": 710,
"text": "Figure 7",
"ref_id": "FIGREF9"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Classics and English text",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "\u00a2 \u00a1 \u00a4 \u00a3 \u00a6 \u00a5 \u00a7 \u00a6 \u00a9 \u00a2 \u00a7 \u00a4 ! # \" % $ ' & ) ( 1 0 3 2 $ # \" % 2 4 # 5 7 6 \u00a2 8 ' @ 9 B A D C F E G 9 3 H P I Q S R 7 0 @ T V U W 8 X W Y \u00a3 b a V \u00a9 \u00a4 c d I W $ b \" f e g @ h i 4 i h D p % R F q c P r s h # t u R v 9 P w F 2 7 % U x h y $ # \" ) ' 5 \u00a7 7 i @ c \" G \u00cf 7 \u00a5 \u00a4 @ 9 \u00a2 3 c g f b $ b \" f e V p \u00a4 s q v \u00a3 ! r s h i F \u00a5 W b v $ # d 7 R 8 e \" F f a 7 A b X 1 0 @ g p i h F j S \u00a5 k f l u % m d 4 a i y \u2022 \u2022 \u2022",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Classics and English text",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "While the data is extremely small (only 1,431 lines, 115,961 characters), our trigram NPYLM can infer the words surprisingly well. This is because our model contains both word and character models that are combined and carefully smoothed, from a Bayesian perspective.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Classics and English text",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "In retrospect, our NPYLM is essentially a hierarchical Markov model where the units (=words) evolve as the Markov process, and each unit has subunits (=characters) that also evolve as the Markov process. Therefore, for such languages as English that have already space-separated tokens, we can also begin with tokens besides the character-based approach in Section 5.3. In this case, each token is a \"character\" whose code is the integer token type, and a sentence is a sequence of \"characters.\" Figure 8 shows a part of the result computed over 100K sentences from Penn Treebank. We can see that some frequent phrases are identified as \"words\", using a fully unsupervised approach. Notice that this is only attainable with NPYLM where each phrase is described as a ngram model on its own, here a word \u221e-gram language model. While we developed an efficient forwardbackward algorithm for unsupervised segmentation, it is reminiscent of CRF in the discriminative approach. Therefore, it is also interesting to combine them in a discriminative way as persued in POS tagging using CRF+HMM (Suzuki et al., 2007) , let alone a simple semi-supervised approach in Section 5.2. This paper provides a foundation of such possibilities.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 1085,
"end": 1106,
"text": "(Suzuki et al., 2007)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 496,
"end": 504,
"text": "Figure 8",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "lastly,shepicturedtoherselfhowthissamelittlesisterofhersw ould,intheafter-time,beherselfagrownwoman;andhowshe wouldkeep,throughallherriperyears,thesimpleandlovingh eartofherchildhood:andhowshewouldgatheraboutherothe rlittlechildren,andmaketheireyesbrightandeagerwithmany astrangetale,perhapsevenwiththedreamofwonderlandoflo ngago:andhowshewouldfeelwithalltheirsimplesorrows,an dfindapleasureinalltheirsimplejoys,rememberingherownc hild-life,andthehappysummerdays.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "(a) Training data (in part). last ly , she pictured to herself how this same little sister of her s would , inthe after -time , be herself agrown woman ; and how she would keep , through allher ripery ears , the simple and loving heart of her child hood : and how she would gather about her other little children ,and make theireyes bright and eager with many a strange tale , perhaps even with the dream of wonderland of longago : and how she would feel with all their simple sorrow s , and find a pleasure in all their simple joys , remember ing her own child -life , and thehappy summerday s . ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we proposed a much more efficient and accurate model for fully unsupervised word segmentation. With a combination of dynamic programming and an accurate spelling model from a Bayesian perspective, our model significantly outperforms the previous reported results, and the inference is very efficient.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "This model is also considered as a way to build a Bayesian Kneser-Ney smoothed word n-gram language model directly from characters with no \"word\" indications. In fact, it achieves lower perplexity per character than that based on supervised segmentations. We believe this will be particularly beneficial to build a language model on such texts as speech transcripts, colloquial texts or unknown languages, where word boundaries are hard or even impossible to identify a priori.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "For instance, TANGO algorithm (Ando and Lee, 2003) essentially finds segments such that character n-gram probabilities are maximized blockwise, averaged over n.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Note that this is different from unigrams, which are posterior distribution given data.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Imagine we try to segment an English character string \"itisrecognizedasthe\u2022 \u2022 \u2022 .\"4 Strictly speaking, this is not \"nested\" in the sense of a Nested Dirichlet process(Rodriguez et al., 2008) and could be called \"hierarchical HPYLM\", which denotes another model for domain adaptation(Wood and Teh, 2008).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In principle fourgrams or beyond are also possible, but will be too complex while the gain will be small. For this purpose, Particle MCMC(Doucet et al., 2009) is promising but less efficient in a preliminary experiment.6 AsMurphy (2002) noted, in semi-HMM we cannot use a standard trick to avoid underflow by normalizing \u03b1[t][k] into p(k|t), since the model is asynchronous. Instead we always compute (7) using logsumexp().",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We used different \u03bb for different word types, such as digits, alphabets, hiragana, CJK characters, and their mixtures.W is a set of words of each such type, and (13) becomes a mixture of Poisson distributions in this case.8 In the following experiments, we set a = 0.2, b = 0.1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Notice that analyzing a test data is not easy for characterwise Gibbs sampler of previous work. Meanwhile, NPYLM easily finds the best segmentation using the Viterbi algorithm once the model is learned.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "We thank Vikash Mansinghka (MIT) for a motivating discussion leading to this research, and Satoru Takabayashi (Google) for valuable technical advice.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Exchangeability and Related Topics",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Aldous",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Springer Lecture Notes in Math. 1117",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--198",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David Aldous, 1985. Exchangeability and Related Topics, pages 1-198. Springer Lecture Notes in Math. 1117.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "An Estimate of an Upper Bound for the Entropy of English",
"authors": [
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "Peter",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Brown",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"Della"
],
"last": "Vincent",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Mercer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jennifer",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lai",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1992,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "18",
"issue": "",
"pages": "31--40",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Peter F. Brown, Vincent J. Della Pietra, Robert L. Mer- cer, Stephen A. Della Pietra, and Jennifer C. Lai. 1992. An Estimate of an Upper Bound for the En- tropy of English. Computational Linguistics, 18:31- 40.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Arnaud",
"middle": [],
"last": "Doucet",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christophe",
"middle": [],
"last": "Andrieu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Roman",
"middle": [],
"last": "Holenstein",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Arnaud Doucet, Christophe Andrieu, and Roman Holenstein. 2009. Particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo. in submission.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "SIGHAN Bakeoff",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tom",
"middle": [
"Emerson"
],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tom Emerson. 2005. SIGHAN Bakeoff 2005. http://www.sighan.org/bakeoff2005/.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Gilks",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Richardson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Spiegelhalter",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "W. R. Gilks, S. Richardson, and D. J. Spiegelhalter. 1996. Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice. Chapman & Hall / CRC.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Interpolating Between Types and Tokens by Estimating Power-Law Generators",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Sharon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Goldwater",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Thomas",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Griffiths",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sharon Goldwater, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Mark Johnson. 2005. Interpolating Between Types and Tokens by Estimating Power-Law Generators. In NIPS 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Contextual Dependencies in Unsupervised Word Segmentation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Sharon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Goldwater",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Thomas",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Griffiths",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Proceedings of ACL/COLING 2006",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "673--680",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sharon Goldwater, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Mark Johnson. 2006. Contextual Dependencies in Un- supervised Word Segmentation. In Proceedings of ACL/COLING 2006, pages 673-680.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "A Bayesian framework for word segmentation: Exploring the effects of context",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Sharon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Goldwater",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Thomas",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Griffiths",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sharon Goldwater, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Mark Johnson. 2009. A Bayesian framework for word segmentation: Exploring the effects of context.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Extended Viterbi algorithm for second order hidden Markov process",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yang",
"middle": [],
"last": "He",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1988,
"venue": "Proceedings of ICPR 1988",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "718--720",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yang He. 1988. Extended Viterbi algorithm for sec- ond order hidden Markov process. In Proceedings of ICPR 1988, pages 718-720.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Improving nonparameteric Bayesian inference: experiments on unsupervised word segmentation with adaptor grammars",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sharon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Goldwater",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mark Johnson and Sharon Goldwater. 2009. Im- proving nonparameteric Bayesian inference: exper- iments on unsupervised word segmentation with adaptor grammars. In NAACL 2009.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Bayesian Inference for PCFGs via Markov Chain Monte Carlo",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Thomas",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Griffiths",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sharon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Goldwater",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "Proceedings of HLT/NAACL 2007",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "139--146",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mark Johnson, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Sharon Gold- water. 2007. Bayesian Inference for PCFGs via Markov Chain Monte Carlo. In Proceedings of HLT/NAACL 2007, pages 139-146.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Improved backing-off for m-gram language modeling",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Reinhard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kneser",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hermann",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "Proceedings of ICASSP",
"volume": "1",
"issue": "",
"pages": "181--184",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Reinhard Kneser and Hermann Ney. 1995. Improved backing-off for m-gram language modeling. In Pro- ceedings of ICASSP, volume 1, pages 181-184.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Building a Japanese Parsed Corpus while Improving the Parsing System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Sadao",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kurohashi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Makoto",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nagao",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "Proceedings of LREC 1998",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "719--724",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sadao Kurohashi and Makoto Nagao. 1998. Building a Japanese Parsed Corpus while Improving the Pars- ing System. In Proceedings of LREC 1998, pages 719-724. http://nlp.kuee.kyoto-u.ac.jp/nl-resource/ corpus.html.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "The Child Language Data Exchange System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Brian",
"middle": [],
"last": "Macwhinney",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Catherine",
"middle": [],
"last": "Snow",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Journal of Child Language",
"volume": "12",
"issue": "",
"pages": "271--296",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Brian MacWhinney and Catherine Snow. 1985. The Child Language Data Exchange System. Journal of Child Language, 12:271-296.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "The Infinite Markov Model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Daichi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mochihashi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Eiichiro",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sumita",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "NIPS",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Daichi Mochihashi and Eiichiro Sumita. 2007. The Infinite Markov Model. In NIPS 2007.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Hidden semi-Markov models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kevin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Murphy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kevin Murphy. 2002. Hidden semi-Markov models (segment models). http://www.cs.ubc.ca/\u02dcmurphyk/ Papers/segment.pdf.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Automatic Extraction of New Words from Japanese Texts using Generalized Forward-Backward Search",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Masaaki",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nagata",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "Proceedings of EMNLP 1996",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "48--59",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Masaaki Nagata. 1996. Automatic Extraction of New Words from Japanese Texts using General- ized Forward-Backward Search. In Proceedings of EMNLP 1996, pages 48-59.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "The Nested Dirichlet Process",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Abel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Rodriguez",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dunson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gelfand",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Journal of the American Statistical Association",
"volume": "103",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1131--1154",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Abel Rodriguez, David Dunson, and Alan Gelfand. 2008. The Nested Dirichlet Process. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103:1131-1154.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "Bayesian Methods for Hidden Markov Models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Steven",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Scott",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Journal of the American Statistical Association",
"volume": "97",
"issue": "",
"pages": "337--351",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Steven L. Scott. 2002. Bayesian Methods for Hidden Markov Models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97:337-351.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Semi-Supervised Structured Output Learning Based on a Hybrid Generative and Discriminative Approach",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jun",
"middle": [],
"last": "Suzuki",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Akinori",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fujino",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hideki",
"middle": [],
"last": "Isozaki",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "Proceedings of EMNLP-CoNLL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "791--800",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jun Suzuki, Akinori Fujino, and Hideki Isozaki. 2007. Semi-Supervised Structured Output Learning Based on a Hybrid Generative and Discriminative Ap- proach. In Proceedings of EMNLP-CoNLL 2007, pages 791-800.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "A Bayesian Interpretation of Interpolated Kneser-Ney",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yee Whye",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teh",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yee Whye Teh. 2006a. A Bayesian Interpreta- tion of Interpolated Kneser-Ney. Technical Report TRA2/06, School of Computing, NUS.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "A Hierarchical Bayesian Language Model based on Pitman-Yor Processes",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yee Whye",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teh",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "Proceedings of ACL/COLING 2006",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "985--992",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yee Whye Teh. 2006b. A Hierarchical Bayesian Lan- guage Model based on Pitman-Yor Processes. In Proceedings of ACL/COLING 2006, pages 985-992.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "A Hierarchical, Hierarchical Pitman-Yor Process Language Model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Frank",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wood",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yee Whye",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teh",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "ICML 2008 Workshop on Nonparametric Bayes",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Frank Wood and Yee Whye Teh. 2008. A Hierarchical, Hierarchical Pitman-Yor Process Language Model. In ICML 2008 Workshop on Nonparametric Bayes.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "Bayesian Semi-Supervised Chinese Word Segmentation for Statistical Machine Translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jia",
"middle": [],
"last": "Xu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jianfeng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gao",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kristina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Toutanova",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hermann",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of COLING 2008",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1017--1024",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jia Xu, Jianfeng Gao, Kristina Toutanova, and Her- mann Ney. 2008. Bayesian Semi-Supervised Chi- nese Word Segmentation for Statistical Machine Translation. In Proceedings of COLING 2008, pages 1017-1024.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "An Empirical Comparison of Goodness Measures for Unsupervised Chinese Word Segmentation with a Unified Framework",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Hai",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhao",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Chunyu",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kit",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of IJCNLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hai Zhao and Chunyu Kit. 2008. An Empirical Com- parison of Goodness Measures for Unsupervised Chinese Word Segmentation with a Unified Frame- work. In Proceedings of IJCNLP 2008.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Hierarchical Pitman-Yor Language Model."
},
"FIGREF1": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Chinese restaurant representation of our Nested Pitman-Yor Language Model (NPYLM)."
},
"FIGREF3": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "For this purpose, we maintain a forward variable \u03b1[t][k] in the bigram case. \u03b1[t][k] is the probability of a string c 1 \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c t with the final k characters being a word (see"
},
"FIGREF4": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "\u03b1[0][0] = 1 and we wrote c n \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 c m as c m n . 6The rationale for (7) is as follows. Since maintaining binary variables z 1 , \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 , z N is equivalent to maintaining a distance to the nearest backward"
},
"FIGREF5": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Forward filtering of \u03b1[t][k] to marginalize out possible segmentations j before t\u2212k. 1: for t = 1 to N do 2:"
},
"FIGREF6": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Forward-Backward sampling of word segmentation w. (in bigram case)"
},
"FIGREF8": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "(b) Segmentation result. Note we used no dictionary."
},
"FIGREF9": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Word segmentation of \"Alice in Wonderland \"."
},
"TABREF1": {
"type_str": "table",
"num": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td>: Semi-supervised and supervised results. Semi-supervised results used only 10K sentences (1/5) of supervised segmentations.</td></tr></table>",
"text": "",
"html": null
}
}
}
} |