Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:15:32.556Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptive graph walk-based similarity measures for parsed text

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2013

EINAT MINKOV  and
WILLIAM W. COHEN
EINAT MINKOV
Affiliation:
Department of Information Systems, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel e-mail: einatm@is.haifa.ac.il
WILLIAM W. COHEN
Affiliation:
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA e-mail: wcohen@cs.cmu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We consider a dependency-parsed text corpus as an instance of a labeled directed graph, where nodes represent words and weighted directed edges represent the syntactic relations between them. We show that graph walks, combined with existing techniques of supervised learning that model local and global information about the graph walk process, can be used to derive a task-specific word similarity measure in this graph. We also propose and evaluate a new learning method in this framework, a path-constrained graph walk variant, in which the walk process is guided by high-level knowledge about meaningful edge sequences (paths) in the graph. Empirical evaluation on the tasks of named entity coordinate term extraction and general word synonym extraction show that this framework is preferable to, or competitive with, vector-based models when learning is applied, and using small to moderate size text corpora.

Type
Articles
Information
Natural Language Engineering , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 361 - 397
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agarwal, A., Chakrabarti, S., and Aggarwal, S. 2006. Learning to rank networked entities. In The Twelfth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD 2006), August 20–23, Philadelphia, USA.Google Scholar
Agirre, E., Alfonseca, E., Hall, K., Kravalova, J., Pasca, M., and Soroa, A. 2009. A study on similarity and relatedness using distributional and wordnet-based approaches. In HLT-NAACL.Google Scholar
Agirre, E., and Soroa, A. 2009. Personalizing pagerank for word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the North American Chapter of the Accosiction of Computational Linguistics (NAACL-HLT), May 31-June 5, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
Barzilay, R., and Elhadad, M. 1999. Text summarizations with lexical chains. In Mani, I. and Maybury, M. (eds.), Advances in Automatic Text Summarization, pp. 111–129. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
Bilotti, M. W., Ogilvie, P., Callan, J., and Nyberg, E. 2007. Structured retrieval for question answering. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Rearch & Development on Information Retrieval, July 23–27, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bunescu, R. C., and Mooney, R. J. 2005. A shortest path dependency kernel for relation extraction. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference and Conference of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMLNP), October 6–8, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.Google Scholar
Burnard, L. 1995. Users Guide for the British National Corpus. British National Corpus Consortium. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Computing Service.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. W., and Minkov, E. 2006. A graph-search framework for associating gene identifiers with documents. BMC Bioinformatics 7 (440)Google Scholar
Collins, M. 2002. Ranking algorithms for named-entity extraction: boosting and the voted perceptron. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), July 6–12, Philadelphia, PA, USA.Google Scholar
Collins, M., and Koo, T. 2005. Discriminative reranking for natural language parsing. Computational Linguistics 31 (1): 25–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, M., and Singer, Y. 1999. Unsupervised models for named entity classification. In Proceedings of the Joint SIGDAT Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora, June 21–22, University of Maryland, MD, USA.Google Scholar
Collins-Thompson, K., and Callan, J. 2005. Query expansion using random walk models. In Proceedings of the ACM 14th Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM), October 31–November 5, Bremen, Germany.Google Scholar
Culotta, A., and Sorensen, J. 2004. Dependency tree kernels for relation extraction. In Proceedings of the Joint 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (ACL-EMNLP), July 21–26, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
de Marneffe, M.-C., MacCartney, B., and Manning, C. D. 2006. Generating typed dependency parses from phrase structure parses. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), May 24–26, Genoa, Italy.Google Scholar
Diligenti, M., Gori, M., and Maggini, M. 2005. Learning web page scores by error back-propagation. In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), July 30–August 5, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
Erkan, G., and Radev, D. 2004. Lexrank: graph-based lexical centrality as salience in text summarization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 22: 457–479.Google Scholar
Fellbaum, C. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fogaras, D., Rácz, B., Csalogány, K., and Sarlós, T. 2005. Towards scaling fully personalized pagerank: algorithms, lower bounds, and experiments. Internet Mathematics 2 (3): 333–358.Google Scholar
Grefenstette, G. 1994. Explorations in Automatic Thesaurus Discovery. Dordrecht, Netherland: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Harrington, B. 2010. A semantic network approach to measuring relatedness. In the Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), August 23–27, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
Hassan, A., and Radev, D. 2010. Identifying text polarity using random walks. In The 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2010), July 11–16, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Haveliwala, T. H. 2002. Topic-sensitive PageRank. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International World Wide Web Conference (WWW), May 7–11, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.Google Scholar
Hearst, M. 1992. Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proceedings o thef 14th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), August 23–28, 1992, Nantes, France.Google Scholar
Hughes, T., and Ramage, D. 2007. Lexical semantic relatedness with random graph walks. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, June 28–30, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
Kamps, J., Marx, M., Mokken, R. J. and de Rijke, M. 2002. Words with attitude. In the Proceedings of the International Conference on Global WordNet, January 21–25, Mysore, India.Google Scholar
Keenan, E., and Comrie, B. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8 (1): 63–99.Google Scholar
Koren, Y., North, S. C., and Volinsky, C. 2006. Measuring and extracting proximity in networks. In Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), August 20–23, Philadelphia, PA, USA.Google Scholar
Lao, N., and Cohen, W. W. 2010. Fast query execution for retrieval models based on path constrained random walks. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), July 25–28, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Lao, N., Subramanya, A., Pereira, F., and Cohen, W. W. 2012. Reading the web with learned syntactic-semantic inference rules. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL), July 12–14, Jeju Island, Korea.Google Scholar
Lin, D. 1998. Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, August 10–14, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
Lin, D., and Pantel, P. 2001. Discovery of inference rules for question answering. Natural Language Engineering 7 (4): 343–360.Google Scholar
Manning, C., and Schütze, H. 1999. Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mihalcea, R. 2005. Unsupervised large-vocabulary word sense disambiguation with graph-based algorithms for sequence data labeling. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT-EMNLP), October 6–8, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Mihalcea, R., and Tarau, P. 2004. Textrank: bringing order into texts. In Proceedings of the Joint 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (ACL-EMNLP), July 21–26, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
Minkov, E., and Cohen, W. W. 2010. Improving graph-walk-based similarity with reranking: case studies for personal information management. Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 29 (1): 41–52.Google Scholar
Mirkin, S., Dagan, I., and Geffet, M. 2006. Integrating pattern-based and distributional similarity methods for lexical entailment acquisition. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL), July 17–21, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
MUC6. 1995. Proceedings of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-6). Columbia, MD: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Navigli, R., and Lapata, M. 2007. Graph connectivity measures for unsupervised word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), January 6–12, Hyderabad, India.Google Scholar
Navigli, R., and Lapata, M. 2010. An experimental study of graph connectivity for unsupervised word sense disambiguation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 32 (4): 678–692.Google Scholar
Padó, S., and Lapata, M. 2007. Dependency-based construction of semantic space models. Computational Linguistics 33 (2).Google Scholar
Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., and Winograd, T. 1998. The pagerank citation ranking: bringing order to the web. Technical Report, Computer Science department, Stanford University. Working Paper 1999–0120.Google Scholar
Resnik, P., and Diab, M. 2000. Measuring verb similarity. In The 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Roark, B., and Charniak, E. 1998. Noun phrase co-occurrence statistics for semi-automatic lexicon construction. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, August 10–14, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
Shen, L., and Joshi, A. K. 2005. Ranking and reranking with perceptron. Machine Learning 60 (1–3): 73–96.Google Scholar
Snow, R., Jurafsky, D., and Ng, A. Y. 2005. Learning syntactic patterns for automatic hypernym discovery. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), December 5–8, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Terra, E., and Clarke, C. L. A. 2003. Frequency estimates for statistical word similarity measures. In Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics (NAACL), June 3–8, Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
Thater, S., Fürstenau, H., and Pinkal, M. 2010. Contextualizing semantic representations using syntactically enriched vector models. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), July 11–16, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Toutanova, K., Manning, C. D., and Ng, A. Y. 2004. Learning random walk models for inducing word dependency distributions. In Proceedings of the Twenty-first International Conference (ICMl), July 4–8, Banff, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
van der Plas, L., and Tiedemann, J. 2006. Finding synonyms using automatic word alignment and measures of distributional similarity. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL), July 17–21, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Wang, R. C., and Cohen, W. W. 2007. Language-independent set expansion of named entities using the web. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007), October 28–31, 2007, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.Google Scholar
Wojtinnek, P.-R., Völker, J., and Pulman, S. 2012. Building semantic networks from plain text and Wikipedia with application to semantic relatedness and noun compound paraphrasing. International Journal of Semantic Computing (IJSC) (Special Issue on Semantic Knowledge Representation), Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 67–92.Google Scholar