Determining semantic relatedness through the measurement of discrimination information using jensen difference

International Journal of Intelligent Systems

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 477-503

  Cai, Di ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPLICATION TASKS; BASIC CONCEPTS; DATA ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE; FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS; IN-DEPTH INVESTIGATION; MEASUREMENT OF DISCRIMINATION INFORMATION; PERFORMANCE EXPERIMENT; RELATEDNESS MEASURES; SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS;

SEMANTICS;

LAW ENFORCEMENT;

EID: 67649283818     PISSN: 08848173     EISSN: 1098111X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/int.20341     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Chiarello C, Burgess C, Richards L, Pollock A. Semantic and associative priming in the cerebral hemispheres: some words do, some words don't⋯ sometimes, some places. Brain Language 1990; 38(1):75-104.
2. Budanitsky A, Hirst G. Evaluating WordNet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness. Assoc Comput Linguistics 2005; 4(1):1-49.
3. Budanitsky A, Hirst G. Semantic distance in WordNet: an experimental, application-oriented evaluation of five measures. In: Proc Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Resources, 2nd Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2001. pp 29-34.
4. Moldovan D, Badulescu A, Tatu M, Antohe D, Girju R. Models for the semantic classification of noun phrases. In: Proc Workshop on Comput Lexical Semantics, 2004. pp 60-67.
5. Nastase V, Szpakowicz S. Exploring noun-modifier semantic relations. In: 5th Int Workshop on Comput Semantics, 2003. pp 285-301.
6. Turney PD, Littman ML, Bigham J, Shnayder V. Combining independent modules to solve multiple-choice synonym and analogy problems. In: Proc Int Conf Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, 2003. pp 482-489.
7. Turney PD. Similarity of semantic relations. Assoc Comput Linguistics 2006; 32(3):379-410.
8. Morris J, Hirst G. Lexical cohesion computed by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text. Assoc Comput Linguistics 1991; 17(1):21-48.
9. Landauer TK, Dumais ST. A solution to Plato's problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, representation of knowledge. Psychol Rev 1997; 104(2):211-240.
10. Cai D, Van Rijsbergen CJ. Learning semantic relatedness from term discrimination information. Expert Syst Appl 2008; 40(1).
11. Florian R, Yarowsky D. Modeling consensus: classifier combination for word sense disambiguation. In: Proc Conf Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2002. pp 25-32.
12. Lee JH, Kim MH, Lee YJ. Information retrieval based on conceptual distance in is-a hierarchies. J Doc, 1993; 49:188-207.
13. Richardson R, Smeaton A, Murphy J. Using WordNet as a knowledge base for measuring semantic similarity between words. In: Proc AICS Conference, 1994.
14. Banerjee S, Pedersen T. Extended gloss overlaps as a measure of semantic relatedness. In: Proc 18th Int Joint Conf Artificial Intelligence, 2003. pp 805-810.
15. Corley C, Mihalcea R. Measuring the semantic similarity of texts. In: Proc ACL Workshop on Empirical Modeling of Semantic Equivalence and Entailment, 2005. pp 13-18.
16. Dagan I, Lee L, Pereira FCN. Similarity-based models of word cooccurrence probabilities. Mach Learn 1999; 34(1-3):43-69. Special issue on natural language learning.
17. Hirst G, Budanitsky A. Correcting real-word spelling errors by restoring lexical cohesion. Natural Lang Eng 2005; 11(1):87-111.
18. Lee L. Measures of distributional similarity. In: Proc 37th Ann Meeting of the Assoc Comput Linguistics, 1999. pp 25-32.
19. Marx I, Dagan Z, Buhmann J, Shamir E. Coupled clustering: a method for detecting structural correspondence. J Mach Learn Res, 2002; 3:747-780.
20. Mohammad S, Hirst G. Distributional measures as proxies for semantic relatedness. Submitted pub.
21. Mohammad S, Hirst G. Distributional measures of concept-distance: a task-oriented evaluation. In: Proc Conf Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2006.
22. Mohammad S, Hirst G. Determining word sense dominance using a thesaurus. In: Proc 11th Conf Eur Chapter of the Assoc Comput Linguistics, 2006. pp 121-128.
23. Pantel P, Lin D. Discovering word senses from text. In Proc ACM SIGKDD Conf Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2002. pp 613-619.
24. Seco N, Veale T, Hayes J. An intrinsic information content metric for semantic similarity in WordNet. In: Proc 16th Euro Conf Artificial Intelligence, 2004.
25. Weeds J, Weir D. Co-occurrence retrieval: a flexible framework for lexical distributional similarity. Assoc Comput Linguistics, 2005. 31(4):439-475.
26. Han L, Sun L, Chen G, Xie L. ADSS: an approach to determining semantic similarity. Adv Eng Soft 2006; 37(2):129-132.
27. Jiang JJ, Conrath DW. Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. In Proc 10th Int Conf Research in Comput Linguistics, 1997. pp 19-33.
28. Pekar V, Staab S. Word classification based on combined measures of distributional and semantic similarity. In: Proc Research Note Sessions of the 10th Conf of the European Chapter of the Assoc Comput Linguistics, 2003. pp 147-150.
29. Resnik P. Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. J Artif Intell Res, 1999; 11:95-130.
30. Rodriguez MA, Egenhofer MJ. Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng, 2003; 15(2):442-456.
31. Nayak TK. On diversity measures based on entropy functions. Commun Stat Theory Method 1985; 14(1):203-215.
32. Rao CR. Diversity: Its measurement, decomposition, apportionment and analysis. Sankhya: IndJStat, 1982;44:1-22.
33. Cover TM, Thomas JA. Elements of information theory. Wiley series in telecommunications. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1991.
34. Sibson R. Information radius. Z. Wahrsch'theorie verw Geb, 1969; 14:149-160.
35. Jardine N, Sibson R. Mathematical taxonomy. New York: Wiley; 1971.
36. Kullback S. Information theory and statistics. New York: Wiley; 1959.
37. Sparck Jones K. A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application to retrieval. J Doc 1972; 28(1):11-21.
38. Zipf GK. Human behavior and the principle of least effect. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1949.
39. Robertson SE. Term frequency and term value. ACM SIGIR Forum, 1981. pp 22-29.
40. Salton G, McGill MH. Introduction to modern information retrieval. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983.
41. Wong SKM, Yao YY. An information-theoretic measure of term specificity. J Am Soc Inform Sci, 1992; 43(1):54-61.
42. Harman D. An experimental study of factors important in document ranking. In: Proc 9th Ann Int ACM-SIGIR Conf Research and Development in Information Retrieval 1986. pp 186-193.
43. Robertson SE, Walker S. Okapi/Keenbow at TREC-8. In: The 8th Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-8), 1999. pp 151-161. NIST special publication.
44. Voorhees EM, Harman D. Overview of the Seventh Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-7). In The 7th Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-7), 1999. pp 1-23. NIST Special Publication.
45. Rocchio JJ. Relevance feedback in information retrieval. In: The SMART retrieval system- Experiments in automatic document processing, 1971. pp 313-323.
46. Buckley C, Salton G. Optimisation of relevance feedback weights. In: Proc 18th Annual Int ACM-SIGIR Conf Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 1995. pp 351-357.
47. Carpineto C, Mori RD, Romano G, Bigi B. An information-theoretic approach to automatic query expansion. ACM Trans Inform Syst 2001; 19(1):1-27.
48. Crammer K, Singer Y. A family of additive online algorithms for category ranking. J Mach Learn, 2003; 3:1025-1058.
49. Fan W, Gordon MD, Pathak P. Effective profiling of consumer information retrieval needs: a unified framework and empirical comparison. Decision Support Syst 2005; 40(2):213-233.