File size: 176,701 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 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 2184 2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191 2192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198 2199 2200 2201 2202 2203 2204 2205 2206 2207 2208 2209 2210 2211 2212 2213 2214 2215 2216 2217 2218 2219 2220 2221 2222 2223 2224 2225 2226 2227 2228 2229 2230 2231 2232 2233 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 2284 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359 2360 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 2393 2394 2395 2396 2397 2398 2399 2400 2401 2402 2403 2404 2405 2406 2407 2408 2409 2410 2411 2412 2413 2414 2415 2416 2417 2418 2419 2420 2421 2422 2423 2424 2425 2426 2427 2428 2429 2430 2431 2432 2433 2434 2435 2436 2437 2438 2439 2440 2441 2442 2443 2444 2445 2446 2447 2448 2449 2450 2451 2452 2453 2454 2455 2456 2457 2458 2459 2460 2461 2462 2463 2464 2465 2466 2467 2468 2469 2470 2471 2472 2473 2474 2475 2476 2477 2478 2479 2480 2481 2482 2483 2484 2485 2486 2487 2488 2489 2490 2491 2492 2493 2494 2495 2496 2497 2498 2499 2500 2501 2502 2503 2504 2505 2506 2507 2508 2509 2510 2511 2512 2513 2514 2515 2516 2517 2518 2519 2520 2521 2522 2523 2524 2525 2526 2527 2528 2529 2530 2531 2532 2533 2534 2535 2536 2537 2538 2539 2540 2541 2542 2543 2544 2545 2546 2547 2548 2549 2550 2551 2552 2553 2554 2555 2556 2557 2558 2559 2560 2561 2562 2563 2564 2565 2566 2567 2568 2569 2570 2571 2572 2573 2574 2575 2576 2577 2578 2579 2580 2581 2582 2583 2584 2585 2586 2587 2588 2589 2590 2591 2592 2593 2594 2595 2596 2597 2598 2599 2600 2601 2602 2603 2604 2605 2606 2607 2608 2609 2610 2611 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2617 2618 2619 2620 2621 2622 2623 2624 2625 2626 2627 2628 2629 2630 2631 2632 2633 2634 2635 2636 2637 2638 2639 2640 2641 2642 2643 2644 2645 2646 2647 2648 2649 2650 2651 2652 2653 2654 2655 2656 2657 2658 2659 2660 2661 2662 2663 2664 2665 2666 2667 2668 2669 2670 2671 2672 2673 2674 2675 2676 2677 2678 2679 2680 2681 2682 2683 2684 2685 2686 2687 2688 2689 2690 2691 2692 2693 2694 2695 2696 2697 2698 2699 2700 2701 2702 2703 2704 2705 2706 2707 2708 2709 2710 2711 2712 2713 2714 2715 2716 2717 2718 2719 2720 2721 2722 2723 2724 2725 2726 2727 2728 2729 2730 2731 2732 2733 2734 2735 2736 2737 2738 2739 2740 2741 2742 2743 2744 2745 2746 2747 2748 2749 2750 2751 2752 2753 2754 2755 2756 2757 2758 2759 2760 2761 2762 2763 2764 2765 2766 2767 2768 2769 2770 2771 2772 2773 2774 2775 2776 2777 2778 2779 2780 2781 2782 2783 2784 2785 2786 2787 2788 2789 2790 2791 2792 2793 2794 2795 2796 2797 2798 2799 2800 2801 2802 2803 2804 2805 2806 2807 2808 2809 2810 2811 2812 2813 2814 2815 2816 2817 2818 2819 2820 2821 2822 2823 2824 2825 2826 2827 2828 2829 2830 2831 2832 2833 2834 2835 2836 2837 2838 2839 2840 2841 2842 2843 2844 2845 2846 2847 2848 2849 2850 2851 2852 2853 2854 2855 2856 2857 2858 2859 2860 2861 2862 2863 2864 2865 2866 2867 2868 2869 2870 2871 2872 2873 2874 2875 2876 2877 2878 2879 2880 2881 2882 2883 2884 2885 2886 2887 2888 2889 2890 2891 2892 2893 2894 2895 2896 2897 2898 2899 2900 2901 2902 2903 2904 2905 2906 2907 2908 2909 2910 2911 2912 2913 2914 2915 2916 2917 2918 2919 2920 2921 2922 2923 2924 2925 2926 2927 2928 2929 2930 2931 2932 2933 2934 2935 2936 2937 2938 2939 2940 2941 2942 2943 2944 2945 2946 2947 2948 2949 2950 2951 2952 2953 2954 2955 2956 2957 2958 2959 2960 2961 2962 2963 2964 2965 2966 2967 2968 2969 2970 2971 2972 2973 2974 2975 2976 2977 2978 2979 2980 2981 2982 2983 2984 2985 2986 2987 2988 2989 2990 2991 2992 2993 2994 2995 2996 2997 2998 2999 3000 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005 3006 3007 3008 3009 3010 3011 3012 3013 3014 3015 3016 3017 3018 3019 3020 3021 3022 3023 3024 3025 3026 3027 3028 3029 3030 3031 3032 3033 3034 3035 3036 3037 3038 3039 3040 3041 3042 3043 3044 3045 3046 3047 3048 3049 3050 3051 3052 3053 3054 3055 3056 3057 3058 3059 3060 3061 3062 3063 3064 3065 3066 3067 3068 3069 3070 3071 3072 3073 3074 3075 3076 3077 3078 3079 3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085 3086 3087 3088 3089 3090 3091 3092 3093 3094 3095 3096 3097 3098 3099 3100 3101 3102 3103 3104 3105 3106 3107 3108 3109 3110 3111 3112 3113 3114 3115 3116 3117 3118 3119 3120 3121 3122 3123 3124 3125 3126 3127 3128 3129 3130 3131 3132 3133 3134 3135 3136 3137 3138 3139 3140 3141 3142 3143 3144 3145 3146 3147 3148 3149 3150 3151 3152 3153 3154 3155 3156 3157 3158 3159 3160 3161 3162 3163 3164 3165 3166 3167 3168 3169 3170 3171 3172 3173 3174 3175 3176 3177 3178 3179 3180 3181 3182 3183 3184 3185 3186 3187 3188 3189 3190 3191 3192 3193 3194 3195 3196 3197 3198 3199 3200 3201 3202 3203 3204 3205 3206 3207 3208 3209 3210 3211 3212 3213 3214 3215 3216 3217 3218 3219 3220 3221 3222 3223 3224 3225 3226 3227 3228 3229 3230 3231 3232 3233 3234 3235 3236 3237 3238 3239 3240 3241 3242 3243 3244 3245 3246 3247 3248 3249 3250 3251 3252 3253 3254 3255 3256 3257 3258 3259 3260 3261 3262 3263 3264 3265 3266 3267 3268 3269 3270 3271 3272 3273 3274 3275 3276 3277 3278 3279 3280 3281 3282 3283 3284 3285 3286 3287 3288 3289 3290 3291 3292 3293 3294 3295 3296 3297 3298 3299 3300 3301 3302 3303 3304 3305 3306 3307 3308 3309 3310 3311 3312 3313 3314 3315 3316 3317 3318 3319 3320 3321 3322 3323 3324 3325 3326 3327 3328 3329 3330 3331 3332 3333 3334 3335 3336 3337 3338 3339 3340 3341 3342 3343 3344 3345 3346 3347 3348 3349 3350 3351 3352 3353 3354 3355 3356 3357 3358 3359 3360 3361 3362 3363 3364 3365 3366 3367 3368 3369 3370 3371 3372 3373 3374 3375 3376 3377 3378 3379 3380 3381 3382 3383 3384 3385 3386 3387 3388 3389 3390 3391 3392 3393 3394 3395 3396 3397 3398 3399 3400 3401 3402 3403 3404 3405 3406 3407 3408 3409 3410 3411 3412 3413 3414 3415 3416 3417 3418 3419 3420 3421 3422 3423 3424 3425 3426 3427 3428 3429 3430 3431 3432 3433 3434 3435 3436 3437 3438 3439 3440 3441 3442 3443 3444 3445 3446 3447 3448 3449 3450 3451 3452 3453 3454 3455 3456 3457 3458 3459 3460 3461 3462 3463 3464 3465 3466 3467 3468 3469 3470 3471 3472 3473 3474 3475 3476 3477 3478 3479 3480 3481 3482 3483 3484 3485 3486 3487 3488 3489 3490 3491 3492 3493 3494 3495 3496 3497 3498 3499 3500 3501 3502 3503 3504 3505 3506 3507 3508 3509 3510 3511 3512 3513 3514 3515 3516 3517 3518 3519 3520 3521 3522 3523 3524 3525 3526 3527 3528 3529 3530 3531 3532 3533 3534 3535 3536 3537 3538 3539 3540 3541 3542 3543 3544 3545 3546 3547 3548 3549 3550 3551 3552 3553 3554 3555 3556 3557 3558 3559 3560 3561 3562 3563 3564 3565 3566 3567 3568 3569 3570 3571 3572 3573 3574 3575 3576 3577 3578 3579 3580 3581 3582 3583 3584 3585 3586 3587 3588 3589 3590 3591 3592 3593 3594 3595 3596 3597 3598 3599 3600 3601 3602 3603 3604 3605 3606 3607 3608 3609 3610 3611 3612 3613 3614 3615 3616 3617 3618 3619 3620 3621 3622 3623 3624 3625 3626 3627 3628 3629 3630 3631 3632 3633 3634 3635 3636 3637 3638 3639 3640 3641 3642 3643 3644 3645 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 3651 3652 3653 3654 3655 3656 3657 3658 3659 3660 3661 3662 3663 | {
"paper_id": "Q17-1012",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T15:12:36.291746Z"
},
"title": "Head-Lexicalized Bidirectional Tree LSTMs",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Zhiyang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teng",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Singapore University of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": "teng@mymail.sutd.edu.sg"
},
{
"first": "Yue",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhang",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Singapore University of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": "zhang@sutd.edu.sg"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Sequential LSTMs have been extended to model tree structures, giving competitive results for a number of tasks. Existing methods model constituent trees by bottom-up combinations of constituent nodes, making direct use of input word information only for leaf nodes. This is different from sequential LSTMs, which contain references to input words for each node. In this paper, we propose a method for automatic head-lexicalization for tree-structure LSTMs, propagating head words from leaf nodes to every constituent node. In addition, enabled by head lexicalization, we build a tree LSTM in the top-down direction, which corresponds to bidirectional sequential LSTMs in structure. Experiments show that both extensions give better representations of tree structures. Our final model gives the best results on the Stanford Sentiment Treebank and highly competitive results on the TREC question type classification task.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "Q17-1012",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Sequential LSTMs have been extended to model tree structures, giving competitive results for a number of tasks. Existing methods model constituent trees by bottom-up combinations of constituent nodes, making direct use of input word information only for leaf nodes. This is different from sequential LSTMs, which contain references to input words for each node. In this paper, we propose a method for automatic head-lexicalization for tree-structure LSTMs, propagating head words from leaf nodes to every constituent node. In addition, enabled by head lexicalization, we build a tree LSTM in the top-down direction, which corresponds to bidirectional sequential LSTMs in structure. Experiments show that both extensions give better representations of tree structures. Our final model gives the best results on the Stanford Sentiment Treebank and highly competitive results on the TREC question type classification task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Both sequence structured and tree structured neural models have been applied to NLP problems. Seminal work uses convolutional neural networks (Collobert and Weston, 2008) , recurrent neural networks (Elman, 1990; Mikolov et al., 2010) and recursive neural networks (Socher et al., 2011) for sequence and tree modeling. Long short-term memory (LSTM) networks have significantly improved accuracies in a variety of sequence tasks Bahdanau et al., 2015) compared to vanilla recurrent neural networks. Addressing diminishing gradients effectively, they have been extended to tree structures, achieving promising results for tasks such as syntactic language modeling , sentiment analysis (Li et al., 2015; Le and Zuidema, 2015; Tai et al., 2015; Teng et al., 2016) and relation extraction (Miwa and Bansal, 2016) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 142,
"end": 170,
"text": "(Collobert and Weston, 2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 199,
"end": 212,
"text": "(Elman, 1990;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 213,
"end": 234,
"text": "Mikolov et al., 2010)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
},
{
"start": 265,
"end": 286,
"text": "(Socher et al., 2011)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF30"
},
{
"start": 428,
"end": 450,
"text": "Bahdanau et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 683,
"end": 700,
"text": "(Li et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 701,
"end": 722,
"text": "Le and Zuidema, 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 723,
"end": 740,
"text": "Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 741,
"end": 759,
"text": "Teng et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF37"
},
{
"start": 784,
"end": 807,
"text": "(Miwa and Bansal, 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Depending on the node type, typical tree structures in NLP can be categorized to constituent trees and dependency trees. A salient difference between the two types of tree structures is in the node. While dependency tree nodes are input words themselves, constituent tree nodes represent syntactic constituents. Only leaf nodes in constituent trees correspond to words. Though LSTM structures have been developed for both types of trees above, we investigate constituent trees in this paper. There are three existing methods for constituent tree LSTMs Tai et al., 2015; Le and Zuidema, 2015) , which make essentially the same extension from sequence structured LSTMs. We take the method of as our baseline. Figure 1 shows the sequence structured LSTM of Hochreiter and Schmidhuber (1997) and the treestructured LSTM of , illustrating the input (x), cell (c) and hidden (h) nodes at a certain time step t. The most important difference between Figure 1(a) and Figure 1 (b) is the branching factor. While a cell in the sequence structure LSTM depends on the single previous hidden node, a cell in the tree-structured LSTM depends on a left hidden node and a right hidden node. Such tree-structured extensions of the sequence structured LSTM assume that the constituent tree is binarized, building hidden nodes from the input words in the bottom-up direction. The leaf node structure is shown in Figure 1 ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 552,
"end": 569,
"text": "Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 570,
"end": 591,
"text": "Le and Zuidema, 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 754,
"end": 787,
"text": "Hochreiter and Schmidhuber (1997)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 707,
"end": 715,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 959,
"end": 967,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 1393,
"end": 1401,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "A second salient difference between the two types of LSTMs is the modeling of input words. While each cell in the sequence structure LSTM directly depends on its corresponding input word ( Figure 1(a) ), only leaf cells in the tree structure LSTM directly depend on corresponding input words ( Figure 1(c) ). This corresponds well to the constituent tree structure, where there is no direct association between non-leaf constituent nodes and input words. However, it leaves the tree structure a degraded version of a perfect binary-branching variation of the sequence-structure LSTM, with one important source of information (i.e. words) missing in forming a cell (Figure 1(b) ).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 189,
"end": 201,
"text": "Figure 1(a)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 295,
"end": 307,
"text": "Figure 1(c)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 666,
"end": 678,
"text": "(Figure 1(b)",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(c).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We fill this gap by proposing an extension to the tree LSTM model, injecting lexical information into every node in the tree. Our method takes inspiration from work on head-lexicalization, which shows that each node in a constituent tree structure is governed by a head word. As shown in Figure 2 , the head word for the verb phrase \"visited Mary\" is \"visited\", and the head word of the adverb phrase \"this afternoon\" is \"afternoon\". Research has shown that head word information can significantly improve the performance of syntactic parsing (Collins, 2003; Clark and Curran, 2004) . Correspondingly, we use the head lexical information of each constituent word as the input node x for calculating the corresponding cell c in Figure 1 Traditional head-lexicalization relies on specific rules (Collins, 2003; Zhang and Clark, 2009) , typically extracting heads from constituent treebanks according to certain grammar formalisms. For better generalization, we use a neural attention mechanism to derive head lexical information automatically, rather than relying on linguistic head rules to find the head lexicon of each constituent, which is language-and formalism-dependent.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 543,
"end": 558,
"text": "(Collins, 2003;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 559,
"end": 582,
"text": "Clark and Curran, 2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 793,
"end": 808,
"text": "(Collins, 2003;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 809,
"end": 831,
"text": "Zhang and Clark, 2009)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF41"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 288,
"end": 296,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
},
{
"start": 727,
"end": 735,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(c).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Based on such head lexicalization, we further make a bidirectional extension of the tree structured LSTM, propagating information in the top-down direction as well as the bottom-up direction. This is analogous to the bidirectional extension of sequence structured LSTMs, which are commonly used for NLP tasks such as speech recognition (Graves et al., 2013) , sentiment analysis (Tai et al., 2015; Li et al., 2015) and machine translation Bahdanau et al., 2015) tasks.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 336,
"end": 357,
"text": "(Graves et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 379,
"end": 397,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 398,
"end": 414,
"text": "Li et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 439,
"end": 461,
"text": "Bahdanau et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(c).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Results on a standard sentiment classification benchmark and a question type classification benchmark show that our tree LSTM structure gives significantly better accuracies compared with the method of . We achieve the best reported results for sentiment classification. Interestingly, the head lexical information that is learned automatically from the sentiment treebank consists of both syntactic head information and key sentiment word information. This shows the advantage of automatic head-finding as compared with rule-based head lexicalization. We make our code available under GPL at https://github.com/ zeeeyang/lexicalized_bitreelstm.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(c).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "LSTM Recurrent neural network (RNN) (Elman, 1990; Mikolov et al., 2010) achieves success on modeling linear structures due to its ability to preserve history over arbitrary length sequences. At each step, RNN decides its hidden state based on both the current input and the previous hidden state. In theory, it can carry over unbounded history. Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) (Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997 ) is a special type of RNN that leverages multiple gate vectors and a memory cell vector to solve the vanishing and exploding gradient problems of training RNNs. It has been successfully applied to parsing (Vinyals et al., 2015a) , sentiment classification (Tai et al., 2015; Li et al., 2015) , speech recognition (Graves et al., 2013) , machine translation Bahdanau et al., 2015) and image captioning (Vinyals et al., 2015b) . There are many variants of sequential LSTMs, such as simple Gated Recurrent Neural Networks (Cho et al., 2014) . Greff et al. (2017) compared various architectures of LSTM. In this paper, we take the standard LSTM with peephole connections (Gers and Schmidhuber, 2000) as a baseline.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 36,
"end": 49,
"text": "(Elman, 1990;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 50,
"end": 71,
"text": "Mikolov et al., 2010)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
},
{
"start": 375,
"end": 408,
"text": "(Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 615,
"end": 638,
"text": "(Vinyals et al., 2015a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF39"
},
{
"start": 666,
"end": 684,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 685,
"end": 701,
"text": "Li et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 723,
"end": 744,
"text": "(Graves et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 767,
"end": 789,
"text": "Bahdanau et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 811,
"end": 834,
"text": "(Vinyals et al., 2015b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF40"
},
{
"start": 929,
"end": 947,
"text": "(Cho et al., 2014)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 950,
"end": 969,
"text": "Greff et al. (2017)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Structured LSTM There has been a line of research that extends the standard sequential LSTM in order to model more complex structures. Kalchbrenner et al. (2016) proposed Grid LSTMs to process multi-dimensional data. Theis and Bethge (2015) proposed Spatial LSTMs to handle image data. Dyer et al. (2015) designed Stack LSTMs by adding a top pointer to sequential LSTMs to deal with push and pop sequences of a stack. Tai et al. (2015) , and Le and Zuidema (2015) (Socher et al., 2013b; Le and Zuidema, 2014) to support information flow over trees. In addition to Tai et al. (2015) , and Le and Zuidema (2015) , who explicitly named their models as Tree LSTMs, Cho et al. (2014) designed gated recurrent units over tree structures, and Chen et al. (2015) introduced gate mechanisms to recursive neural networks. These can also be regarded as variants of Tree LSTMs.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 135,
"end": 161,
"text": "Kalchbrenner et al. (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
},
{
"start": 217,
"end": 240,
"text": "Theis and Bethge (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF38"
},
{
"start": 286,
"end": 304,
"text": "Dyer et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 418,
"end": 435,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 442,
"end": 463,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 464,
"end": 486,
"text": "(Socher et al., 2013b;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF33"
},
{
"start": 487,
"end": 508,
"text": "Le and Zuidema, 2014)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 564,
"end": 581,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 588,
"end": 609,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 661,
"end": 678,
"text": "Cho et al. (2014)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 720,
"end": 754,
"text": "structures, and Chen et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Both and Le and Zuidema (2015) proposed Binary Tree LSTM models, which can be applied to situations where there are exactly two children of each internal node in a tree. The difference between and Le and Zuidema (2015) is that besides using two forget gates, Le and Zuidema (2015) also make use of two input gates to let a node know its sibling. Tai et al. (2015) introduced Child-Sum Tree LSTM and Nary Tree LSTM. Child-Sum Tree LSTMs can support multiple children, while N-ary Tree LSTMs work for trees with a branching factor of at most N . In this perspective, Binary Tree LSTM is a special case of N-ary Tree LSTM with N = 2.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 9,
"end": 30,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 197,
"end": 218,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 259,
"end": 280,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 346,
"end": 363,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "When a Child-Sum Tree LSTM is applied to a dependency tree, it is referred to as a Dependency Tree LSTM. A Binary Tree LSTM is also referred to as a Constituent Tree LSTM. Based on Tai et al. (2015) , Miwa and Bansal (2016) introduced a Tree LSTM model that can handle different types of children. A dependency tree naturally contains lexical information at every node, while only leaf nodes contain lexical information in a constituent tree. None of these methods (Tai et al., 2015; Le and Zuidema, 2015) make direct use of lexical input for internal nodes when using constituent Tree LSTMs.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 181,
"end": 198,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 201,
"end": 223,
"text": "Miwa and Bansal (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
},
{
"start": 465,
"end": 483,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 484,
"end": 505,
"text": "Le and Zuidema, 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Bi-LSTM Another common extension to sequential LSTM is to include bidirectional information (Graves et al., 2013) , which can model history both left-to-right and right-to-left. The aforementioned Tree LSTM models (Tai et al., 2015; Le and Zuidema, 2015) propagate the history of children to their parent in the bottom-up direction only, while ignoring the top-down information flow from parents to children. proposed a top-down Tree LSTM to estimate the generation probability of a dependency tree. However, no corresponding bottom-up Tree LSTM is incorporated into their model. Paulus et al. (2014) leveraged bidirectional information over recursive binary trees by propagating global belief down from the tree root to leaf nodes. However, their model is based on recursive neural network rather than LSTM. Miwa and Bansal (2016) adopted a bidirectional Tree LSTM model to jointly extract named entities and relations under a dependency tree structure. For constituent tree structures, however, their model does not work due to lack of word inputs on non-leaf constituent nodes, and in particular the root node. Our head lexicalization allows us to investigate the top-down constituent Tree LSTM. To our knowledge, we are the first to report a bidirectional constituent Tree LSTM.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 92,
"end": 113,
"text": "(Graves et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 214,
"end": 232,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 233,
"end": 254,
"text": "Le and Zuidema, 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 580,
"end": 600,
"text": "Paulus et al. (2014)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
},
{
"start": 809,
"end": 831,
"text": "Miwa and Bansal (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "A sequence-structure LSTM estimates a sequence of hidden state vectors given a sequence of input vectors, through the calculation of a sequence of hidden cell vectors using a gate mechanism. For NLP, the input vectors are typically word embeddings (Mikolov et al., 2013) , but can also include partof-speech (POS) embeddings, character embeddings or other types of information. For notational convenience, we refer to the input vectors as lexical vectors.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 248,
"end": 270,
"text": "(Mikolov et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Formally, given an input vector sequence x 1 , x 2 , . . . , x n , each state vector h t is estimated from the Hadamard product of a cell vector c t and a corresponding output gate vector o t",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "h t = o t \u2297 tanh(c t )",
"eq_num": "(1)"
}
],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Here the cell vector depends on both the previous cell vector c t , and a combination of the previous state vector h t\u22121 ; the current input vector x t :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "c t = f t \u2297 c t\u22121 + i t \u2297 g t g t = tanh(W xg x t + W hg h t\u22121 + b g )",
"eq_num": "(2)"
}
],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The combination of c t\u22121 and g t is controlled by the Hadamard product between a forget gate vector f t and an input gate vector i t , respectively. The gates o t , f t and i t are defined as follows",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "i t = \u03c3(W xi x t + W hi h t\u22121 + W ci c t\u22121 + b i ) f t = \u03c3(W xf x t + W hf h t\u22121 + W cf c t\u22121 + b f ) o t = \u03c3(W xo x t + W ho h t\u22121 + W co c t + b o ), (3)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "where \u03c3 is the sigmoid function. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "W xg , W hg , b g , W xi , W hi , W ci , b i , W xf , W hf , W cf , b f , W xo , W",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "c R t\u22121 , calculating c t as c t = f L t \u2297 c L t\u22121 + f R t \u2297 c R t\u22121 + i t \u2297 g t ,",
"eq_num": "(4)"
}
],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "and the input/output gates i t /o t as",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "i t = \u03c3 N \u2208{L,R} (W N hi h N t\u22121 + W N ci c N t\u22121 ) + b i o t = \u03c3 N \u2208{L,R} W N ho h N t\u22121 + W co c t + b o",
"eq_num": "(5)"
}
],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The forget gate f t is split into f L t and f R t for regulating c L t\u22121 and c R t\u22121 , respectively:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "f L t = \u03c3 N \u2208{L,R} (W N hf l h N t\u22121 + W N cf l c N t\u22121 ) + b f l f R t = \u03c3 N \u2208{L,R} (W N hfr h N t\u22121 + W N cfr c N t\u22121 ) + b fr (6) g t depends on both h L t\u22121 and h R t\u22121 , but as shown in Figure 1 (b), it does not depend on x t g t = tanh N \u2208{L,R} W N hg h N t\u22121 + b g (7)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Finally, the hidden state vector h t is calculated in the same way as in the sequential LSTM model shown in Equation 1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "W L hi , W R hi , W L ci , W R ci , b i , W L ho , W R ho , W co , b o , W L hf l , W R hf l , W L cf l , W R cf l , b f l , W L hfr , W R hfr , W L cfr , W R cfr , b fr , W L hg , W R hg",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "and b g are model parameters.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "We introduce an input lexical vector x t to the calculation of each cell vector c t via a bottom-up head propagation mechanism. As shown in the shaded nodes in Figure 3 (b), the head propagation mechanism is parallel to the cell propagation mechanism. In contrast, the method of in Figure 3 (a) does not have the input vector x t for non-leaf constituents.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 160,
"end": 168,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
},
{
"start": 282,
"end": 291,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "There are multiple ways to choose a head lexicon for a given binary-branching constituent. One simple method is to choose the head lexicon of the left child as the head (left-headedness). Correspondingly, an alternative is to use the right child for head lexicon. There is less consistency in the governing head lexicons across variations of the same type of constituents with slightly different typologies. Hence, simple baselines can be less effective compared to linguistically motivated head findings.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Rather than selecting head lexicons using manually-defined head-finding rules, which are language-and formalism-dependent (Collins, 2003) , we cast head finding as a part of the neural network model, learning the head lexicon of each constituent by a gated combination of the head lexicons of its two children 1 . Formally,",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 122,
"end": 137,
"text": "(Collins, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "x t = z t \u2297 x L t\u22121 + (1 \u2212 z t ) \u2297 x R t\u22121 ,",
"eq_num": "(8)"
}
],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "where x t represents the head lexicon vector of the current constituent, x L t\u22121 represents the head lexicon of its left child constituent, and x R t\u22121 represents the head lexicon of its right child constituent. The gate z t is calculated based on x L t\u22121 and",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "x R t\u22121 , z t = \u03c3(W L zx x L t\u22121 + W R zx x R t\u22121 + b z )",
"eq_num": "(9)"
}
],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Here W L zx , W R zx and b z are model parameters.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Given head lexicon vectors for nodes, the Tree LSTM of can be extended by leveraging x t in calculating the corresponding c t . In particular, x t is used to estimate the input (i t ), output 1 In this paper, we work on binary trees only, which is a common form for CKY and shift-reduce parsing. Typical binarization methods, such as head binarization (Klein and Manning, 2003) , also rely on specific head-finding rules.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 192,
"end": 193,
"text": "1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 352,
"end": 377,
"text": "(Klein and Manning, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "(o t ) and forget (f R t and f L t ) gates:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "i t = \u03c3 W xi x t + N \u2208{L,R} (W N hi h N t\u22121 + W N ci c N t\u22121 ) + b i f L t = \u03c3 W xf x t + N \u2208{L,R} (W N hf l h N t\u22121 + W N cf l c N t\u22121 ) + b f l f R t = \u03c3 W xf x t + N \u2208{L,R} (W N hfr h N t\u22121 + W N cfr c N t\u22121 ) + b fr o t = \u03c3 W xo x t + N \u2208{L,R} W N ho h N t\u22121 + W co c t + b o",
"eq_num": "(10)"
}
],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "In addition, x t is also used in computing g t ,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "g t = tanh W xg x t + N \u2208{L,R} W N hg h N t\u22121 + b g (11)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "With the new definition of i t , f R t , f L t and g t , the computing of c t remains the same as the baseline Tree LSTM model as shown in Equation 4. Similarly, h t remains the Hadamard product of c t and the new o t as shown in Equation 1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "In this model,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "W xi , W xf , W",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "xg and W xo are newly-introduced model parameters. The use of x t in computing the gate and cell values are consistent with those in the baseline sequential LSTM.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Lexicalized Tree LSTM",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Given a sequence of input vectors [x 1 , x 2 , . . . , x n ], a bidirectional sequential LSTM (Graves et al., 2013) computes two sets of hidden state vectors, [h 1 ,h 2 , . . . ,h n ] and [h n ,h n\u22121 , . . . ,h 1 ] in the left-to-right and the right-to-left directions, respectively. The final hidden state h i of the input x i is the concatenation of the corresponding state vectors in the two LSTMs,",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 94,
"end": 115,
"text": "(Graves et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "h i =h i \u2295h n\u2212i+1",
"eq_num": "(12)"
}
],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "The two LSTMs can share the same model parameters or use different parameters. We choose the latter in our baseline experiments. We make a bidirectional extension to the Lexicalized Tree LSTM in Section 4.2 by following the sequential LSTMs in Section 3, adding an additional Different from the bottom-up direction, each hidden state in the top-down LSTM has exactly one predecessor. In fact, the path from the root of a tree down to any node forms a sequential LSTM.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Note, however, that two different sets of model parameters are used when the current node is the left and the right child of its predecessor. Denoting the two sets of parameters as U L and U R , respectively, the hidden state vector h 7 in Figure 4 is calculated from the hidden state vector h 1 using the parameter set sequence",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 240,
"end": 248,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "[U L , U L , U R ]. Similarly, h 8 is calcu- lated from h 1 using [U L , U R , U L ]",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": ". At each step t, the computing of h t follows the sequential LSTM model:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "h t = o t \u2297 tanh(c t\u22121 ) c t = f t \u2297 c t\u22121 + i t \u2297 g t g t = tanh(W N xg\u2193 x t\u22121 + W N hg\u2193 h t\u22121 + b N g\u2193 )",
"eq_num": "(13)"
}
],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "With the gate values being defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "i t = \u03c3(W N xi\u2193 x t + W N hi\u2193 h t\u22121 + W N ci\u2193 c t\u22121 + b N i\u2193 ) f t = \u03c3(W N xf \u2193 x t + W N hf \u2193 h t\u22121 + W N cf \u2193 c t\u22121 + b N f \u2193 ) o t = \u03c3(W N xo\u2193 x t + W N ho\u2193 h t\u22121 + W N co\u2193 c t + b N o\u2193 )",
"eq_num": "(14)"
}
],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "Here N \u2208 {L, R} and",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "U N = {W N xg\u2193 , W N hg\u2193 , b N g\u2193 , W N xi\u2193 , W N hi\u2193 , W N ci\u2193 , b N i\u2193 , W N xf \u2193 , W N hf \u2193 , W N cf \u2193 , b N f \u2193 , W N xo\u2193 , W N ho\u2193 , W N co\u2193 , b N o\u2193 }. U L",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "and U R are model parameters in the top-down Tree LSTM.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "One final note is that the top-down Tree LSTM is enabled by the head propagation mechanism, which allows a head lexicon node to be made available for the root constituent node. Without such information, it would be difficult to build top-down LSTM for constituent trees.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bidirectional Extensions",
"sec_num": "4.3"
},
{
"text": "We apply the bidirectional Tree LSTM to classification tasks, where the input is a sentence with its binarized constituent tree, and the output is a discrete label. We denote the bottom-up hidden state vector of the root ash ROOT \u2191 , the top-down hidden state vector of the root ash ROOT \u2193 and the top-down hidden state vectors of the input words x 1 , x 2 , . . . , x n ash 1 ,h 2 , . . . ,h n . We take the concatenation of h ROOT \u2191 ,h ROOT \u2193 and the average ofh 1 ,h 2 , . . . ,h n as the final representation h of the sentence:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Usage for Classification",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "h =h ROOT \u2191 \u2295h ROOT \u2193 \u2295 1 n n i=1h i",
"eq_num": "(15)"
}
],
"section": "Usage for Classification",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "A softmax classifier is used to predict the probability p j of sentiment label j from h by",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Usage for Classification",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "h l = ReLU(W hl h + b hl ) P = softmax(W lp h l + b lp ) p j = P [j],",
"eq_num": "(16)"
}
],
"section": "Usage for Classification",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "where W hl , b hl , W lp and b lp are model parameters, and ReLU is the rectifier function f (x) = max(0, x). During prediction, the largest probability component of P will be taken as the answer.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Usage for Classification",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "We train our classifier to maximize the conditional log-likelihood of gold labels of training samples. Formally, given a training set of size |D|, the training objective is defined by",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "L(\u0398) = \u2212 |D| i=1 log p yi + \u03bb 2 ||\u0398|| 2 ,",
"eq_num": "(17)"
}
],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "where \u0398 is the set of model parameters, \u03bb is a regularization parameter, y i is the gold label of the ith training sample and p y i is obtained according to Equation 16. For sequential LSTM models, we collect errors over each sequence. For Tree LSTMs, we sum up errors at every node. The model parameters are optimized using ADAM (Kingma and Ba, 2015) without gradient clipping, with the default hyper-parameters of the AdamTrainer in the Dynet toolkits. 2 We also use dropout (Srivastava et al., 2014) at lexical input embeddings with a fixed probability p drop to avoid overfitting. p drop is set to 0.5 for all tasks.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 455,
"end": 456,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 477,
"end": 502,
"text": "(Srivastava et al., 2014)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF34"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "Following Tai et al. (2015) , Li et al. (2015) , and Le and Zuidema (2015) , we use Glove-300d word embeddings 3 to train our model. The pretrained word embeddings are fine-tuned for all tasks. Unknown words are handled in two steps. First, if a word is not contained in the pretrained word embeddings, but its lowercased form exists in the embedding table, we use the lowercase as a replacement. Second, if both the original word and its lowercased form cannot be found, we treat the word as unk. The embedding vector of the UNK token is initialized as the average of all embedding vectors.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 10,
"end": 27,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 30,
"end": 46,
"text": "Li et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 53,
"end": 74,
"text": "Le and Zuidema (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "We use one hidden layer and the same dimensionality settings for both sequential and Tree LSTMs. LSTM hidden states are of size 150. The output hidden size is 128 and 64 for the sentiment classification task and the question type classification task, respectively. Each model is trained for 30 iterations. The same training procedure repeats five times using different random seeds, with parameters being evaluated at the end of every iteration on the development set. The model that gives the best development result is used for final tests.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "The effectiveness of our model is tested mainly on a sentiment classification task and a question type classification task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Sentiment Classification. For sentiment classification, we use the same data settings as . Specifically, we use the Stanford Sentiment Treebank (Socher et al., 2013b) . Each sentence is annotated with a constituent tree. Every internal node corresponds to a phrase. Each node is manually assigned an integer sentiment label from 0 to 4, that correspond to five sentiment classes: very negative, negative, neutral, positive and very positive, respectively. The root label represents the sentiment label of the whole sentence.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 144,
"end": 166,
"text": "(Socher et al., 2013b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF33"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Tasks",
"sec_num": "7.1"
},
{
"text": "We perform both binary classification and finegrained classification. Following previous work, we use labels of all phrases for training. Gold-standard 3 http://nlp.stanford.edu/data/glove.840B.300d.zip tree structures are used for training and testing (Le and Zuidema, 2015; Li et al., 2015; Tai et al., 2015) . Accuracies are evaluated for both the sentence root labels and phrase labels.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 253,
"end": 275,
"text": "(Le and Zuidema, 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 276,
"end": 292,
"text": "Li et al., 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 293,
"end": 310,
"text": "Tai et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Tasks",
"sec_num": "7.1"
},
{
"text": "Question Type Classification. For the question type classification task, we use the TREC data (Li and Roth, 2002) . Each training sample in this dataset contains a question sentence and its corresponding question type. We work on the sixway coarse classification task, where the six question types are ENTY, HUM, LOC, DESC, NUM and ABBR, corresponding to ENTITY, HUMAN, LOCA-TION, DESCRIPTION, NUMERIC VALUE and AB-BREVIATION, respectively. For example, the type for the sentence \"What year did the Titanic sink?\" is NUM. The training set consists of 5,452 examples and the test set contains 500 examples. Since there is no development set, we follow Zhou et al. 2015, randomly extracting 500 examples from the training set as a development set. Unlike the sentiment treebank, there is no annotated tree for each sentence. Instead, we obtain an automatically parsed tree for each sentence using ZPar 4 off-the-shelf (Zhang and Clark, 2011) . Another difference between the TREC data and the sentiment treebank is that there is only one label, at the root node, rather than a label for each phrase.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 94,
"end": 113,
"text": "(Li and Roth, 2002)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
},
{
"start": 916,
"end": 939,
"text": "(Zhang and Clark, 2011)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF42"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Tasks",
"sec_num": "7.1"
},
{
"text": "We consider two models for our baselines. The first is bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) (Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997; Graves et al., 2013) . Our bidirectional constituency Tree LSTM (BiConTree) is compared against BiLSTM to investigate the effectiveness of tree structures. For the sentiment task, following Tai et al. (2015) and Li et al. (2015) , we convert the treebank into sequences to allow the bidirectional LSTM model to make use of every phrase span as a training example. The second baseline model is the bottom-up Tree LSTM model of . We compare this model with our lexicalized bidirectional models to show the effects of adding head lexicalization and top-down information flow. (Socher et al., 2013b) 45.7 80.7 85.4 87.6",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 83,
"end": 117,
"text": "(Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 118,
"end": 138,
"text": "Graves et al., 2013)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 308,
"end": 325,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 330,
"end": 346,
"text": "Li et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 691,
"end": 713,
"text": "(Socher et al., 2013b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF33"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "7.2"
},
{
"text": "BiLSTM (Li et al., 2015) 49.8 83.3 86.7 -DepTree (Tai et al., 2015) 48.4 -85.7 -ConTree (Le and Zuidema, 2015) 49.9 -88.0 -ConTree 50.1 ---",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 7,
"end": 24,
"text": "(Li et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 49,
"end": 67,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 88,
"end": 110,
"text": "(Le and Zuidema, 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "7.2"
},
{
"text": "ConTree (Li et al., 2015) 50.4 83.4 86.7 -ConTree (Tai et al., 2015) 51. Table 1 shows the main results for the sentiment classification task, where RNTN is the recursive neural tensor model of Socher et al. (2013b) , Con-Tree and DepTree denote constituency Tree LSTMs and dependency Tree LSTMs, respectively. Our reimplementations of sequential bidirectional LSTM and constituent Tree LSTM give comparable results to the original implementations.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 8,
"end": 25,
"text": "(Li et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 50,
"end": 68,
"text": "(Tai et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 194,
"end": 215,
"text": "Socher et al. (2013b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF33"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 73,
"end": 80,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Baselines",
"sec_num": "7.2"
},
{
"text": "After incorporating head lexicalization into our constituent Tree LSTM, the fine-grained sentiment classification accuracy increases from 51.2 to 52.8, and the binary sentiment classification accuracy increases from 88.5 to 89.2, which demonstrates the effectiveness of the head lexicalization mechanism. Table 1 also shows that a vanilla top-down Con-Tree LSTM by head-lexicalization (i.e. the topdown half of the final bidirectional model) alone obtains comparable accuracies to the bottom-up Con-Tree LSTM model. The BiConTree model can further improve the classification accuracies by 0.7 points (fine-grained) and 1.3 points (binary) compared to the unidirectional bottom-up lexicalized ConTree LSTM model, respectively. Table 1 includes 5 class accuracies for all nodes. There is no significant difference between different models, consistent with the observation of Li et al. (2015) . To our knowledge, these are the best reported results for this sentiment classification task. (Silva et al., 2011) 95.0 Bidirectional ConTree LSTM 94.8 ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 873,
"end": 889,
"text": "Li et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 986,
"end": 1006,
"text": "(Silva et al., 2011)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF29"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 305,
"end": 312,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF4"
},
{
"start": 726,
"end": 733,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Main Results",
"sec_num": "7.3"
},
{
"text": "Introducing head lexicalization and bidirectional extension to the model increases the model complexity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Time and Model Size",
"sec_num": "7.4"
},
{
"text": "In this section, we analyze training time and model size with the fine-grained sentiment classification task. We run all the models using an i7-4790 3.60GHz CPU with a single thread. Table 3 shows the average running time for different models over 30 iterations. The baseline ConTree model takes about 1.3 hours to finish the training procedure. Con-Tree+Lex takes about 1.5 times longer than Con-Tree. BiConTree takes about 3.2 hours, which is about 2.5 times longer than that of ConTree. Table 4 compares the model sizes. We did not count the number of parameters in the lookup table since these parameters are the same for all models. Because the size of LSTM models mainly depends on the dimensionality of the state vector h, we change the size of h to study the effect of model size. When |h| = 150, the model size of the baseline model ConTree is the smallest, which consists of about 538K parameters. The model size of Con-Tree+Lex is about 1.4 times as large as that of the baseline model. The bidirectional model BiCon-Tree is the largest, about 1.7 times as large as that of the ConTree+Lex model. However, this parameter set is not very large compared to the modern memory capacity, even for a computer with 16GB RAM. In conclusion, in terms of both time, number of parameters and accuracy, head lexicalization method is Table 4 also helps to clarify whether the gain of the BiConTree model over the ConTree+Lex model is from the top-down information flow or more parameters. For the same model, increasing the model size can improve the performance to some extent. For example, doubling the size of |h| (75 \u2192 150) increases the performance from 51.5 to 52.8 for the ConTree+Lex model. Similarly, we boost the performance of the BiConTree model when doubling the size of |h| from 75 to 150. However, doubling the size of |h| from 150 to 300 empirically decreases the performance of the Con-Tree+Lex model. The size of the BiConTree model with |h| = 75 is much smaller than that of the Con-Tree+Lex model with |h| = 150. However the performance of these two models is quite close, which indicates that top-down information is useful even for a small model. A ConTree+Lex model with |h| = 215 and a BiConTree model with |h| = 150 are of similar size. The performance of the Con-Tree+Lex model is again worse than that of the Bi-ConTree model (52.5 v.s. 53.5), which shows the effectiveness of top-down information.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 183,
"end": 190,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": "TABREF7"
},
{
"start": 490,
"end": 497,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF9"
},
{
"start": 1332,
"end": 1339,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": "TABREF9"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Time and Model Size",
"sec_num": "7.4"
},
{
"text": "In this experiment, we investigate the effect of our head lexicalization method over heuristic baselines. We consider three baseline methods, namely left branching (L), right branching (R) and averaging (A). For L, a parent node accepts lexical information of its left child while ignoring the right child. Correspondingly, for R, a parent node accepts lexical information of its right child while ignoring the left child. For A, a parent node takes the average of the lexical vectors of its children. Table 5 shows the accuracies on the test set, where G denotes our gated head lexicalization method de-Method L R A G Root Accuracy (%) 51.1 51.6 51.8 53.5 Table 5 : Test set accuracies of four head lexicalization methods on fine-grained classification. scribed in Section 4.1. R gives better results compared to L due to relatively more right-branching structures in this treebank. A simple average yields similar results compared with right branching. In contrast, G outperforms A method by considering the relative weights of each branch according to treelevel contexts.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 502,
"end": 509,
"text": "Table 5",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 657,
"end": 664,
"text": "Table 5",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization Methods",
"sec_num": "7.5"
},
{
"text": "We then investigate what lexical heads can be learned by G. Interestingly, the lexical heads contain both syntactic and sentiment information. Some heads correspond well to syntactic rules (Collins, 2003) , others are driven by subjective words. Compared to Collins' rules, our method found 30.68% and 25.72% overlapping heads on the development and test sets, respectively.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 189,
"end": 204,
"text": "(Collins, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization Methods",
"sec_num": "7.5"
},
{
"text": "Based on the cosine similarity between the head lexical vector and its children, we visualize the head of a node by choosing the head of the child that gives the largest similarity value. Figure 5 shows some examples, where <> indicates head words, sentiment labels (e.g. 2, 3) are also included. In Figure 5a, \"Emerges\" is the syntactic head word of the whole phrase, which is consistent with Collins-style head finding. However, \"rare\" is the head word of the phrase \"something rare\", which is different from the syntactic head. Similar observations are found in Figure 5b , where \"good\" is the head word of the whole phrase, rather than the syntactic head \"place\". The sentiment label of \"good\" and the sentiment label of the whole phrase are both 3. Figure 5c shows more complex interactions between syntax and sentiment for deciding the head word. Table 6 shows some example sentences incorrectly predicted by the baseline bottom-up tree model, but correctly labeled by our final model. The head word of sentence #1 by our model is \"Gloriously\", which is consistent with the sentiment of the whole sentence. This shows how head lexicalization can affect sentiment classification results. Sentences #2 and #3 show the usefulness of top-down informa- tion for complex semantic structures, where compositionality has subtle effects. Our final model improves the results for the 'very negative' and 'very positive' classes by 10% and 11%, respectively. It also boosts the accuracies for sentences with negation (e.g. \"not\", \"no\", and \"none\") by 4.4%. Figure 6 shows the accuracy distribution accord- Figure 6 : Distribution of 5-class accuracies at the root level according to the sentence length.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 188,
"end": 196,
"text": "Figure 5",
"ref_id": "FIGREF6"
},
{
"start": 300,
"end": 306,
"text": "Figure",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 565,
"end": 574,
"text": "Figure 5b",
"ref_id": "FIGREF6"
},
{
"start": 754,
"end": 763,
"text": "Figure 5c",
"ref_id": "FIGREF6"
},
{
"start": 853,
"end": 860,
"text": "Table 6",
"ref_id": "TABREF11"
},
{
"start": 1552,
"end": 1560,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1601,
"end": 1609,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Head Lexicalization Methods",
"sec_num": "7.5"
},
{
"text": "ing to the sentence length. We find that our model can improve the classification accuracy for longer sentences (>30 words) by 3.5 absolute points compared to the baseline ConTree LSTM of , which demonstrates the strength of our model for handling long range information. By considering bidirectional information over tree structures, our model is aware of more contexts for making better predictions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Error Analysis",
"sec_num": "7.6"
},
{
"text": "Our main results are obtained on semanticdriven sentence classification tasks, where the automatically-learned head words contain mixed syntactic and semantic information. To further investigate the effectiveness of automatically learned head information on a pure syntactic task, we additionally conduct a simple parser reranking experiment. Further, we discuss findings in language modeling by Kuncoro et al. (2017) on the model of recurrent neural network grammars (Dyer et al., 2016) . Finally, we show potential future work leveraging our idea for more tasks.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 396,
"end": 417,
"text": "Kuncoro et al. (2017)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 468,
"end": 487,
"text": "(Dyer et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applications",
"sec_num": "8"
},
{
"text": "We use our tree LSTM models to rerank the 10 best outputs of the Charniak (2000) parser. Given a sentence x, suppose that Y (x) is a set of parse tree candidates generated by a baseline parser for x, the goal of a syntactic reranker is to choose the best parsing hypothesis\u0177 according to a score function f (x, y; \u0398). Formally,",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 65,
"end": 80,
"text": "Charniak (2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "y = arg max y\u2208Y (x) {f (x, y; \u0398)}",
"eq_num": "(18)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "For each tree y of sentence x, we follow Socher et al. (2013a) and define the score f (x, y; \u0398) as the sum of scores of each constituent node,",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 41,
"end": 62,
"text": "Socher et al. (2013a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF31"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "f (x, y; \u0398) = r\u2208node(x,y) Score(r; \u0398)",
"eq_num": "(19)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "Without loss of generality, we take a binary node as an example. Given a node A, suppose that its two children are B and C. Let the learned composition state vectors of A, B and C by our proposed Tree-LSTM model be n A , n B and n C , respectively. The head word vector of node A is h A . Score(A; \u0398) is defined as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "o BC A = ReLU (W L s n B + W R s n C + W H s h A + b s ) Score BC A = log(sof tmax(o BC A ))[A],",
"eq_num": "(20)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "where W L s , W R s and b s are model parameters. Training. Given a training instance x i , Y (x i ) in the training set D, we use a max-margin loss function to train our reranking model. Suppose that the oracle parse tree in",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "Y (x i ) is y i , the loss function L(\u0398) is L(\u0398) = 1 |D| |D| i=1 r i (\u0398) + \u03bb 2 ||\u0398|| 2",
"eq_num": "(21)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "Here \u03bb is a regularization parameter and r i (\u0398) is the margin loss between y i and the highest score tree\u0177 i predicted by the reranking model. r i (\u0398) is given by",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "r i (\u0398) = max yi\u2208Y (xi) (0, f (x i ,\u0177 i ; \u0398)+ \u2206(y i ,\u0177 i ) \u2212 f (x i , y i ; \u0398)),",
"eq_num": "(22)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "where \u2206(y i ,\u0177 i ) is the structure loss between y i and y i by counting the number of incorrect nodes in the oracle tree:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "\u2206(y i ,\u0177 i ) = node\u2208\u0177i \u03ba1{node / \u2208 y i }.",
"eq_num": "(23)"
}
],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "\u03ba is a scalar. With this loss function, we require the score of the oracle tree to be higher than the other candidates by a score margin. Intuitively, the score of the y i will increase and the score of\u0177 i will decrease during training.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "Results. We experiment on the WSJ portion of the Penn Treebank, following the standard split (Collins, 2003) . Sections 2-21 are used for training, Section 24 and Section 23 are the development set and test set, respectively. The Charniak parser (Charniak, 2000; Charniak and Johnson, 2005 ) is adopted for our baseline by following the settings of Choe and Charniak (2016) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 93,
"end": 108,
"text": "(Collins, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 246,
"end": 262,
"text": "(Charniak, 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 263,
"end": 289,
"text": "Charniak and Johnson, 2005",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 358,
"end": 373,
"text": "Charniak (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "To obtain N-best lists on the development set and test set, we first train a baseline parser on the training set. To obtain N-best lists on the training data, we split the training data into 20 folds and trained 20 parsers. Each parser was trained on 19 folds data and used to produce the n-best list of the remaining fold. For the neural reranking model, we use the pretrained word vectors from Collobert et al. (2011) . The input dimension is 50. The dimension of state vectors in Tree-LSTM model is 60. These parameters are trained with ADAM (Kingma and Ba, 2015) with a batch size of 20. We set \u03ba = 0.1 for all experiments. For practical reasons, we use the Con-Tree+Lex model to learn the node representations and define Y (x i ) to be the 10-best parsing trees of x i . Table 7 shows the reranking results on WSJ test set. The baseline F1 score is 89.7. Our ConTree improves the baseline model to 90.6. Using Con-Tree+Lex model can further improve the performance (90.6 \u2192 90.9). This suggests that automatic heads can also be useful for a syntactic task. Among neural rerankers, our model outperforms Socher et al. (2013a) , but underperforms current state-of-theart models, including sequence-to-sequence based LSTM language models (Vinyals et al., 2015a; Choe and Charniak, 2016) and recurrent neural network grammars (Dyer et al., 2016) . This is likely due to our simple reranking configurations and settings 5 . Nevertheless, it serves our goal of contrasting the tree LSTM models.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 396,
"end": 419,
"text": "Collobert et al. (2011)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1107,
"end": 1128,
"text": "Socher et al. (2013a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF31"
},
{
"start": 1239,
"end": 1262,
"text": "(Vinyals et al., 2015a;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF39"
},
{
"start": 1263,
"end": 1287,
"text": "Choe and Charniak, 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 1326,
"end": 1345,
"text": "(Dyer et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 776,
"end": 783,
"text": "Table 7",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntactic Parsing",
"sec_num": "8.1"
},
{
"text": "Kuncoro et al. (2017) investigate composition functions in recurrent neural network grammars (RNNG) (Dyer et al., 2016) , finding that syntactic head information can be automatically learned. Their observa-Model F 1 Baseline (Charniak (2000) ) 89.7 ConTree 90.6 ConTree+Lex 90.9 Our 10-best Oracle 94.8 Table 7 : Reranking results on WSJ test set.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 100,
"end": 119,
"text": "(Dyer et al., 2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 225,
"end": 241,
"text": "(Charniak (2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 303,
"end": 310,
"text": "Table 7",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Language Modeling",
"sec_num": "8.2"
},
{
"text": "tion is consistent with ours. Formally, an RNNG is a tuple N, \u03a3, R, S, \u0398 , where N is the set of nonterminals, \u03a3 is the set of terminals, R is a set of top-down transition-based rules, S is the start symbol and \u0398 is the set of model parameters. Given S, the derivation process resembles transition-based parsing, which is performed incrementally from left to right. Unlike surface language models, RNNGs model sentences with explicit grammar. Comparing naive sequence-to-sequence models of syntax (Vinyals et al., 2015a) , RNNGs have the advantage of explicitly modeling syntactic composition between constituents, by combining the vector representation of child constituents into a single vector representation of their parent using a neural network. Kuncoro et al. (2017) show that such compositions are the key to the success, and further investigate several alternatives neural network structures.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 497,
"end": 520,
"text": "(Vinyals et al., 2015a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF39"
},
{
"start": 752,
"end": 773,
"text": "Kuncoro et al. (2017)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Language Modeling",
"sec_num": "8.2"
},
{
"text": "In particular, they compare vanilla LSTMs to attention networks when composing child constituents. Interestingly, the attention values represent syntactic heads among the child constituents to some extent. In addition, the vector constituent representation implicitly reflects constituent types. Their finding is consistent with ours in that a neural network can learn pure syntactic head information from constituent vectors.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Language Modeling",
"sec_num": "8.2"
},
{
"text": "Our head-lexicalized tree model can be used for all tasks that require representation learning for sentences, given their constituent syntax. One example of future work is relation extraction. For example, given the sentence \"John is from Google Inc.\", a relation 'works in' can be extracted between 'John' and 'Google Inc.'. Miwa and Bansal (2016) solve this task by using the Child-Sum tree representation of Tai et al. (2015) to represent the input sentence, extracting features for the two entities according to their related nodes in the dependency tree, and then conducting rela-tion classification based on these features. Headlexicalization and top-down information can potentially be useful for improving relation extraction in the framework of Miwa and Bansal (2016) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 326,
"end": 348,
"text": "Miwa and Bansal (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
},
{
"start": 411,
"end": 428,
"text": "Tai et al. (2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF36"
},
{
"start": 754,
"end": 776,
"text": "Miwa and Bansal (2016)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relation Extraction",
"sec_num": "8.3"
},
{
"text": "We proposed lexicalized variants for constituent tree LSTMs. Learning the heads of constituents automatically using a neural model, our lexicalized tree LSTM is applicable to arbitrary binary branching trees in CFG, and is formalism-independent. In addition, lexical information on the root further allows a top-down extension to the model, resulting in a bidirectional constituent Tree LSTM. Experiments on two well-known datasets show that head-lexicalization improves the unidirectional Tree LSTM model. In addition, the bidirectional Tree LSTM gives superior labeling results compared to both unidirectional Tree LSTMs and bidirectional sequential LSTMs.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "9"
},
{
"text": "Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 5, pp. 163-177, 2017. Action Editor: Scott Yih.Submission batch: 5/2016; Revision batch: 12/2016; Published 6/2017. c 2017 Association for Computational Linguistics. Distributed under a CC-BY 4.0 license.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "https://github.com/clab/dynet",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "https://github.com/SUTDNLP/ZPar, version 7.5",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Dyer et al. (2016) employs 2-layerd LSTMs with input and hidden dimensions of size 256 and 128. Choe and Charniak (2016) use 3-layered LSTMs with both the input and hidden dimensions of size 1500. In addition, we only use the tree LSTM for scoring candidate parses in order to isolate the effect of tree LSTMs. In contrast, the previous works use the complex feature combinations in order to achieve high accuracies, which is different from our goal.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "We thank the anonymous reviewers for their detailed and constructive comments. Yue Zhang is the corresponding author.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Dzmitry",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bahdanau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kyunghyun",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cho",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yoshua",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bengio",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Representations",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Ben- gio. 2015. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Represen- tations, San Diego, California, USA, May.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Coarse-tofine n-best parsing and MaxEnt discriminative reranking",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Eugene",
"middle": [],
"last": "Charniak",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "173--180",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Eugene Charniak and Mark Johnson. 2005. Coarse-to- fine n-best parsing and MaxEnt discriminative rerank- ing. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 173-180, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, June. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "A maximum-entropy-inspired parser",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Eugene",
"middle": [],
"last": "Charniak",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics conference",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "132--139",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Eugene Charniak. 2000. A maximum-entropy-inspired parser. In Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguis- tics conference, pages 132-139, Seattle, Washington, April. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Sentence modeling with gated recursive neural network",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Xinchi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Xipeng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Qiu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Chenxi",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Shiyu",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Xuanjing",
"middle": [],
"last": "Huang",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "793--798",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Xinchi Chen, Xipeng Qiu, Chenxi Zhu, Shiyu Wu, and Xuanjing Huang. 2015. Sentence modeling with gated recursive neural network. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 793-798, Lisbon, Portu- gal, September. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "On the properties of neural machine translation: Encoder-Decoder approaches",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kyunghyun",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cho",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Bart",
"middle": [],
"last": "Van Merrienboer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dzmitry",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bahdanau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yoshua",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bengio",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "Proceedings of SSST-8, Eighth Workshop on Syntax, Semantics and Structure in Statistical Translation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "103--111",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kyunghyun Cho, Bart van Merrienboer, Dzmitry Bah- danau, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. On the proper- ties of neural machine translation: Encoder-Decoder approaches. In Proceedings of SSST-8, Eighth Work- shop on Syntax, Semantics and Structure in Statisti- cal Translation, pages 103-111, Doha, Qatar, October. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Parsing as language modeling",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kook",
"middle": [],
"last": "Do",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Eugene",
"middle": [],
"last": "Choe",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Charniak",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2331--2336",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Do Kook Choe and Eugene Charniak. 2016. Parsing as language modeling. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Lan- guage Processing, pages 2331-2336, Austin, Texas, USA, November. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Parsing the WSJ using CCG and Log-Linear models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Clark",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "James",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Curran",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "103--110",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Stephen Clark and James R. Curran. 2004. Pars- ing the WSJ using CCG and Log-Linear models. In Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics, pages 103-110, Barcelona, Spain, July. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Head-driven statistical models for natural language parsing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [],
"last": "Collins",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "",
"volume": "29",
"issue": "",
"pages": "589--637",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michael Collins. 2003. Head-driven statistical models for natural language parsing. Computational linguis- tics, 29(4):589-637.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "A unified architecture for natural language processing: Deep neural networks with multitask learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ronan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Collobert",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jason",
"middle": [],
"last": "Weston",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "160--167",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ronan Collobert and Jason Weston. 2008. A unified ar- chitecture for natural language processing: Deep neu- ral networks with multitask learning. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learn- ing, pages 160-167, New York, NY, USA, July. ACM.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Transitionbased dependency parsing with stack long short-term memory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Chris",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dyer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Miguel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ballesteros",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Wang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ling",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Austin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Matthews",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Noah",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "334--343",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chris Dyer, Miguel Ballesteros, Wang Ling, Austin Matthews, and Noah A. Smith. 2015. Transition- based dependency parsing with stack long short-term memory. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meet- ing of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, pages 334-343, Beijing, China, July. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Recurrent neural network grammars",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Chris",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dyer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Adhiguna",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kuncoro",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Miguel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ballesteros",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Noah",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "199--209",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chris Dyer, Adhiguna Kuncoro, Miguel Ballesteros, and Noah A. Smith. 2016. Recurrent neural network grammars. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Tech- nologies, pages 199-209, San Diego, California, USA, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Finding structure in time",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jeffrey",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Elman",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1990,
"venue": "Cognitive science",
"volume": "14",
"issue": "",
"pages": "179--211",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jeffrey L. Elman. 1990. Finding structure in time. Cog- nitive science, 14(2):179-211.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Recurrent nets that time and count",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Felix",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J\u00fcrgen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gers",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Schmidhuber",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2000 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "189--194",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Felix A. Gers and J\u00fcrgen Schmidhuber. 2000. Recur- rent nets that time and count. In Proceedings of the 2000 International Joint Conference on Neural Net- works, pages 189-194, Como, Italy, July. IEEE.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Hybrid speech recognition with deep bidirectional LSTM",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [],
"last": "Graves",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Navdeep",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jaitly",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Abdel-Rahman",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mohamed",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "273--278",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Alex Graves, Navdeep Jaitly, and Abdel-rahman Mo- hamed. 2013. Hybrid speech recognition with deep bidirectional LSTM. In 2013 IEEE Workshop on Au- tomatic Speech Recognition and Understanding, pages 273-278, Olomouc, Czech, December. IEEE.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "LSTM: A search space odyssey",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Klaus",
"middle": [],
"last": "Greff",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Rupesh",
"middle": [
"Kumar"
],
"last": "Srivastava",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Koutn\u00edk",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bas",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J\u00fcrgen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Steunebrink",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Schmidhuber",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "99",
"pages": "1--11",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Klaus Greff, Rupesh Kumar Srivastava, Jan Koutn\u00edk, Bas R. Steunebrink, and J\u00fcrgen Schmidhuber. 2017. LSTM: A search space odyssey. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, PP(99):1- 11.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Long short-term memory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Sepp",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hochreiter",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J\u00fcrgen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Schmidhuber",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1997,
"venue": "Neural computation",
"volume": "9",
"issue": "8",
"pages": "1735--1780",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sepp Hochreiter and J\u00fcrgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation, 9(8):1735- 1780.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Adam: A method for stochastic optimization",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nal",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kalchbrenner",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ivo",
"middle": [],
"last": "Danihelka",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [],
"last": "Graves",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Representations",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nal Kalchbrenner, Ivo Danihelka, and Alex Graves. 2016. Grid long short-term memory. In Proceed- ings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Representations, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May. Diederik Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2015. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations, San Diego, USA, May.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Accurate unlexicalized parsing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 41st",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dan Klein and Christopher D. Manning. 2003. Accu- rate unlexicalized parsing. In Proceedings of the 41st",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Association for Computational Linguistics",
"authors": [],
"year": null,
"venue": "Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "423--430",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 423-430, Sapporo, Japan, July. As- sociation for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "What do recurrent neural network grammars learn about syntax?",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Adhiguna",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kuncoro",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Miguel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ballesteros",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lingpeng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kong",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Chris",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dyer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Graham",
"middle": [],
"last": "Neubig",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Noah",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Smith",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1249--1258",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Adhiguna Kuncoro, Miguel Ballesteros, Lingpeng Kong, Chris Dyer, Graham Neubig, and Noah A. Smith. 2017. What do recurrent neural network grammars learn about syntax? In Proceedings of the 15th Con- ference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1249-1258, Valen- cia, Spain, April. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "The insideoutside recursive neural network model for dependency parsing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Phong",
"middle": [],
"last": "Le",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Willem",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zuidema",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "729--739",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Phong Le and Willem Zuidema. 2014. The inside- outside recursive neural network model for depen- dency parsing. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Process- ing, pages 729-739, Doha, Qatar, October. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Compositional distributional semantics with long short term memory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Phong",
"middle": [],
"last": "Le",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Willem",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zuidema",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Fourth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "10--19",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Phong Le and Willem Zuidema. 2015. Compositional distributional semantics with long short term memory. In Proceedings of the Fourth Joint Conference on Lex- ical and Computational Semantics, pages 10-19, Den- ver, Colorado, USA, June. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Learning question classifiers",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Xin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roth",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--7",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Xin Li and Dan Roth. 2002. Learning question classi- fiers. In Proceedings of the 19th International Confer- ence on Computational linguistics, pages 1-7, Taipei, Taiwan, August. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "When are tree structures necessary for deep learning of representations?",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jiwei",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Thang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Luong",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jurafsky",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Eduard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hovy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2304--2314",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jiwei Li, Thang Luong, Dan Jurafsky, and Eduard Hovy. 2015. When are tree structures necessary for deep learning of representations? In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 2304-2314, Lisbon, Por- tugal, September. Association for Computational Lin- guistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "Gated graph sequence neural networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yujia",
"middle": [],
"last": "Li",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Daniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tarlow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Marc",
"middle": [],
"last": "Brockschmidt",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Zemel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Representations",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yujia Li, Daniel Tarlow, Marc Brockschmidt, and Richard S. Zemel. 2016. Gated graph sequence neu- ral networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Learning Representations, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "Recurrent neural network based language model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tomas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mikolov",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Martin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Karafi\u00e1t",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lukas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Burget",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cernock\u1ef3",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sanjeev",
"middle": [],
"last": "Khudanpur",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2010,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1045--1048",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tomas Mikolov, Martin Karafi\u00e1t, Lukas Burget, Jan Cernock\u1ef3, and Sanjeev Khudanpur. 2010. Recur- rent neural network based language model. In Pro- ceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the Inter- national Speech Communication Association, pages 1045-1048, Chiba, Japan, September.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tomas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mikolov",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kai",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Greg",
"middle": [],
"last": "Corrado",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jeffrey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dean",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "Workshop Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Learning Representations",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient estimation of word represen- tations in vector space. In Workshop Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA, May.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF27": {
"ref_id": "b27",
"title": "End-to-End relation extraction using LSTMs on sequences and tree structures",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Makoto",
"middle": [],
"last": "Miwa",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mohit",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bansal",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1105--1116",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Makoto Miwa and Mohit Bansal. 2016. End-to-End re- lation extraction using LSTMs on sequences and tree structures. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meet- ing of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1105-1116, Berlin, Germany, August. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF28": {
"ref_id": "b28",
"title": "Global belief recursive neural networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Romain",
"middle": [],
"last": "Paulus",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Socher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2888--2896",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Romain Paulus, Richard Socher, and Christopher D. Manning. 2014. Global belief recursive neural net- works. In Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, pages 2888-2896, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, December.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF29": {
"ref_id": "b29",
"title": "From symbolic to sub-symbolic information in question classification",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Joao",
"middle": [],
"last": "Silva",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lu\u00edsa",
"middle": [],
"last": "Coheur",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2011,
"venue": "Artificial Intelligence Review",
"volume": "35",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "137--154",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Joao Silva, Lu\u00edsa Coheur, Ana Cristina Mendes, and An- dreas Wichert. 2011. From symbolic to sub-symbolic information in question classification. Artificial Intel- ligence Review, 35(2):137-154.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF30": {
"ref_id": "b30",
"title": "Parsing natural scenes and natural language with recursive neural networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Socher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Cliff",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Ng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2011,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Machine Learning",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "129--136",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Richard Socher, Cliff C. Lin, Andrew Y. Ng, and Christo- pher D. Manning. 2011. Parsing natural scenes and natural language with recursive neural networks. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 129-136, Bellevue, Wash- ington, USA, June-July.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF31": {
"ref_id": "b31",
"title": "Parsing with compositional vector grammars",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Socher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bauer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Ng",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 51st",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Richard Socher, John Bauer, Christopher D. Manning, and Andrew Y. Ng. 2013a. Parsing with composi- tional vector grammars. In Proceedings of the 51st",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF32": {
"ref_id": "b32",
"title": "Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"authors": [],
"year": null,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "455--465",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 455-465, Sofia, Bulgaria, August. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF33": {
"ref_id": "b33",
"title": "Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Socher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [],
"last": "Perelygin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jean",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jason",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chuang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Ng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [],
"last": "Potts",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2013,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1631--1642",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Richard Socher, Alex Perelygin, Jean Wu, Jason Chuang, Christopher D. Manning, Andrew Y. Ng, and Christo- pher Potts. 2013b. Recursive deep models for seman- tic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In Pro- ceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1631- 1642, Seattle, Washington, USA, October. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF34": {
"ref_id": "b34",
"title": "Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nitish",
"middle": [],
"last": "Srivastava",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Geoffrey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hinton",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [],
"last": "Krizhevsky",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ilya",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sutskever",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ruslan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Salakhutdinov",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "The Journal of Machine Learning Research",
"volume": "15",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "1929--1958",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nitish Srivastava, Geoffrey Hinton, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. 2014. Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15(1):1929-1958.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF35": {
"ref_id": "b35",
"title": "Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ilya",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sutskever",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Oriol",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vinyals",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [],
"last": "Quoc",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Le",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "3104--3112",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, and Quoc V. Le. 2014. Se- quence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 3104-3112, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Decem- ber.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF36": {
"ref_id": "b36",
"title": "Improved semantic representations from tree-structured long short-term memory networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kai Sheng",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tai",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Socher",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christopher",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1556--1566",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kai Sheng Tai, Richard Socher, and Christopher D. Man- ning. 2015. Improved semantic representations from tree-structured long short-term memory networks. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics and the 7th Inter- national Joint Conference on Natural Language Pro- cessing, pages 1556-1566, Beijing, China, July. Asso- ciation for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF37": {
"ref_id": "b37",
"title": "Context-sensitive lexicon features for neural sentiment analysis",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Zhiyang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Teng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yue",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vo Duy-Tin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhang",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1629--1638",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Zhiyang Teng, Vo Duy-Tin, and Yue Zhang. 2016. Context-sensitive lexicon features for neural sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1629-1638, Austin, Texas, USA, November. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF38": {
"ref_id": "b38",
"title": "Generative image modeling using spatial LSTMs",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Lucas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Theis",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Matthias",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bethge",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1918--1926",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lucas Theis and Matthias Bethge. 2015. Generative im- age modeling using spatial LSTMs. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 1918- 1926, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, December.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF39": {
"ref_id": "b39",
"title": "Grammar as a foreign language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Oriol",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vinyals",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "\u0141ukasz",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kaiser",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Terry",
"middle": [],
"last": "Koo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Slav",
"middle": [],
"last": "Petrov",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ilya",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sutskever",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Geoffrey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hinton",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "2755--2763",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Oriol Vinyals, \u0141ukasz Kaiser, Terry Koo, Slav Petrov, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2015a. Gram- mar as a foreign language. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 2755-2763, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, December.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF40": {
"ref_id": "b40",
"title": "Show and tell: A neural image caption generator",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Oriol",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vinyals",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alexander",
"middle": [],
"last": "Toshev",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Samy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bengio",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dumitru",
"middle": [],
"last": "Erhan",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "3156--3164",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Oriol Vinyals, Alexander Toshev, Samy Bengio, and Du- mitru Erhan. 2015b. Show and tell: A neural image caption generator. In Proceedings of the IEEE Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 3156-3164, Boston, MA, USA, June.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF41": {
"ref_id": "b41",
"title": "Transitionbased parsing of the chinese treebank using a global discriminative model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yue",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Clark",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Parsing Technologies",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "162--171",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yue Zhang and Stephen Clark. 2009. Transition- based parsing of the chinese treebank using a global discriminative model. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Parsing Technologies, pages 162-171, Paris, France, October. Association for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF42": {
"ref_id": "b42",
"title": "Syntactic processing using the generalized perceptron and beam search",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yue",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Clark",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2011,
"venue": "Computational linguistics",
"volume": "37",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "105--151",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Yue Zhang and Stephen Clark. 2011. Syntactic process- ing using the generalized perceptron and beam search. Computational linguistics, 37(1):105-151.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF43": {
"ref_id": "b43",
"title": "Top-down tree long short-term memory networks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Xingxing",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Liang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mirella",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lapata",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2016,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "310--320",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Xingxing Zhang, Liang Lu, and Mirella Lapata. 2016. Top-down tree long short-term memory networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computa- tional Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 310-320, San Diego, California, USA, June. As- sociation for Computational Linguistics.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF44": {
"ref_id": "b44",
"title": "A C-LSTM neural network for text classification",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Chunting",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhou",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Chonglin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sun",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Zhiyuan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Liu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Francis",
"middle": [
"C M"
],
"last": "Lau",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"arXiv": [
"arXiv:1301.3781"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chunting Zhou, Chonglin Sun, Zhiyuan Liu, and Francis C. M. Lau. 2015. A C-LSTM neural network for text classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF45": {
"ref_id": "b45",
"title": "Long short-term memory over recursive structures",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Xiaodan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zhu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Parinaz",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sobhani",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hongyu",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guo",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1604--1612",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Xiaodan Zhu, Parinaz Sobhani, and Hongyu Guo. 2015. Long short-term memory over recursive structures. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 1604-1612, Lille, France, July.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"text": "Topology of sequential and tree LSTMs. (a) nodes in sequential LSTM; (b) non-leaf nodes in tree LSTM; (c) leaf nodes in tree LSTM. Shaded nodes represent lexical input vectors. White nodes represent hidden state vectors.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF1": {
"text": "(b).",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "Head-Lexicalized Constituent Tree.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF3": {
"text": "Contrast between Zhu et al. (2015) (a) and this paper (b). Shaded nodes represent lexical input vectors. White nodes represent hidden state vectors.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF4": {
"text": "Top-down tree LSTM. set of hidden state vectors in the top-down direction.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF5": {
"text": "the road to hell is paved with good intentions\".",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF6": {
"text": "Visualizing head words found automatically by our model.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"TABREF1": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "sequence LSTM by splitting the previous state vector h t\u22121 into a left child state vector h L t\u22121 and a right child state vector h R t\u22121 , and the previous cell vector c t\u22121 into a left child cell vector c L t\u22121 and a right child cell vector",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF4": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "Test set accuracies for sentiment classification tasks.",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF5": {
"content": "<table><tr><td>Model</td><td>Accuracy</td></tr><tr><td>Baseline BiLSTM Baseline BottomUp ConTree LSTM SVM</td><td>93.8 93.4</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "shows the question type classification results. Our final model gives better results compared",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF6": {
"content": "<table><tr><td>Model</td><td colspan=\"3\">ConTree ConTree+Lex BiConTree</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">Time (s) 4,664</td><td>7,157</td><td>11,434</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "TREC question type classification results.",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF7": {
"content": "<table><tr><td>to the BiLSTM model and the bottom-up ConTree</td></tr><tr><td>model, achieving comparable results to the state-of-</td></tr><tr><td>the-art SVM classifier with carefully designed fea-</td></tr><tr><td>tures.</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "Averaged training time over 30 iterations.",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF9": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "Effect of model size.",
"num": null,
"html": null
},
"TABREF11": {
"content": "<table/>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": "Example output sentences.",
"num": null,
"html": null
}
}
}
} |