Directional distributional similarity for lexical inference

Natural Language Engineering

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 359-389

  Kotlerman, Lili ^a   Dagan, Ido ^a   Szpektor, Idan ^b   Zhitomirsky Geffet, Maayan ^a  

^a BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b YAHOO RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS; DISTRIBUTIONAL SIMILARITIES; LEXICAL SEMANTICS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SIMILARITY MEASURE; WORD SIMILARITY;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 78650065357     PISSN: 13513249     EISSN: 14698110     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1351324910000124     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Agirre, E., Enrique A., Keith H., Jana K., Marius P., and Aitor S. 2009. A study on similarity and relatedness using distributional and WordNet-based approaches. In NAACL HLT'09: Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Boulder, CO, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 19-27.
2. Banerjee, S., and Ted, P. 2002. An adapted lesk algorithm for word sense disambiguation using WordNet. In CICLing, Mexico City, ME, pp. 136-145.
3. Barak, L., Dagan, I., and Shnarch E. 2009. Text categorization from category name via lexical reference. In Proceedings of NAACL HLT 2009: Short Papers, pp. 33-36, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
4. Bar-Haim, R., Dagan, I., Dolan, B., Ferro, L., Giampiccolo, D., Magnini, B., and Szpektor, I. 2006. The second PASCAL recognising textual entailment challenge. In Proceedings of the Second PASCAL Recognising Textual Entailment Challenge, Venice, Italy, pp. 33-36.
5. Basili, R., Cammisa, M., and Moschitti, A. 2006. A semantic kernel to classify texts with very few training examples. Informatica (Slovenia) 30(2):163-172.
6. Bhagat, R., Pantel, P., and Hovy, E. 2007. LEDIR: an unsupervised algorithm for learning directionality of inference rules. In Proceedings of EMNLP-CoNLL, Prague, Czech Republic.
7. Bloehdorn, S., and Moschitti, A. 2007. Structure and semantics for expressive text kernels. In CIKM, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 861-864.
8. Budanitsky, A., and Hirst, G. 2006. Evaluating WordNet-based measures of semantic distance. Computational Linguistics 32(1):13-47.
9. Caraballo, S. A. 1999. Automatic construction of a hypernym-labeled noun hierarchy from text. In Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the ACL, College Park, MD, USA.
10. Chen, S. F., and Goodman, J. 1996. An empirical study of smoothing techniques for language modeling. In ACL, Santa Cruz, CA, USA, pp. 310-318.
11. Church, K. W., and Hanks, P. 1990. Word association norms, mutual information and lexicography. Computational Linguistics 16(1):22-29.
12. Clarke, D. 2009. Context-theoretic semantics for natural language: an overview. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Geometrical Models of Natural Language Semantics, pp. 112-119. Athens, Greece: Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Dagan, I., Glickman, O., and Magnini, M. 2006. The PASCAL recognising textual entailment challenge. In J. Quiñonero-Candela, I. Dagan, B. Magnini, F. d'Alché-Buc (eds.), Machine learning challegues. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3944, pp. 177-190. Springer.
14. Dagan, I., Lee, L., and Pereira, F. 1999. Similarity-based models of cooccurrence probabilities. Machine Learning 34 (1-3): 43-69.
15. Fellbaum, C. 1998. WordNet - An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press.
16. Gasperin, C., Gamallo, P., Agustini, A., Lopes, G., and de Lima, V. 2001. Using syntactic contexts for measuring word similarity. In the Workshop on Semantic Knowledge Acquisition and Categorisation (ESSLI 2001), Helsinki, Finland.
17. Gauch, S., Wang, J., and Rachakonda, S. M. 1999. A corpus analysis approach for automatic query expansion and its extension to multiple databases. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 17(3):250-269.
18. Geffet, M., and Dagan, I. 2005. The distributional inclusion hypotheses and lexical entailment. In Proceedings of ACL, Michigan, USA.
19. Harabagiu, S., and Hickl, A. 2006. Methods for using textual entailment in open-domain question answering. In ACL-44: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 905-912, Morristown, NJ.
20. Harabagiu, S. M., Hickl, A., and Lacatusu, V. F. 2007. Satisfying information needs with multi-document summaries. Information Processing and Management 43(6):1619-1642.
21. Hindle, D. 1990. Noun classification from predicate-argument structures. In Proceedings of ACL, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
22. Jiang, J. J., and Conrath, D. W. 1997. Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Research in Computational Linguistics, Tapei, Taiwan, pp. 19-33.
23. Jing, Y., and Croft, W. B. 1994. An association thesaurus for information retrieval. In Proceedings of RIAO 94, Rockefeller University, NY, USA, pp. 146-160.
24. Jones, M. N., and Mewhort, D. J. K. 2007. Representing word meaning and order information in a composite holographic lexicon. Psychological Review 114(1):1-37.
25. Ko, Y., and Seo, J. 2004. Learning with unlabeled data for text categorization using a bootstrapping and a feature projection technique. In ACL 2004, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 255-262.
26. Leacock, C., and Chodorow, M. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database - Combining Local Context and WordNet Similarity for Word Sense Identification, in Wordnet: An Electronic Lexical Database, chap. 11, pp. 265-283. MIT Press.
27. Lee, L. 1999. Measures of distributional similarity. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, College Park, MD, USA, pp. 25-32.
28. Lin, D. 1998a. Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In Proceedings of COLINGACL, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
29. Lin, D. 1998b. Dependency-based evaluation of minipar. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Evaluation of Parsing Systems at LREC 1998, Granada, Spain.
30. Lin, D. 1998c. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Madison, WI, USA.
31. Lin, D., and Pantel, P. 2001. DIRT - discovery of inference rules from text. In Proceedings of ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 2001, San Francisco, CA, USA, pp. 323-328.
32. Liu, B., Li, X., Lee, W. S., and Yu, P. S. 2004. Text classification by labeling words. In AAAI-2004, San Jose, CA, USA, pp. 425-430.
33. Lloret, E., Ferra'ndez, O., Munoz, R., and Palomar, M. 2008. A text summarization approach under the influence of textual entailment. In B. Sharp and M. Zock (eds.), NLPCS, pp. 22-31. INSTICC.
34. Mandala, R., Tokunaga, T., and Tanaka, T. 1999. Combining multiple evidence from different types of thesaurus for query expansion. In Proceedings of SIGIR, Berkeley, CA, USA.
35. McCallum, A., and Nigam, K. 1999. Text classification by bootstrapping with keywords, em and shrinkage. In ACL'99 Workshop for Unsupervised Learning in Natural Language Processing, pp. 52-58, College Park, Maryland, USA.
36. Michelbacher, L., Evert, S., and Schutze, H. 2007. Asymmetric association measures. In Proceedings of RANLP, Borovets, Bulgaria.
37. Mirkin, S., Dagan, I., and Shnarch, E. 2009a. Evaluating the inferential utility of lexicalsemantic resources. In EACL'09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Athens, Greece: Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 558-566.
38. Mirkin, S., Specia, L., Cancedda, N., Dagan, I., Dymetman, M., and Szpektor, I. 2009b. Source-language entailment modeling for translating unknown terms. In Proceedings of ACL-IJCNLP. Singapore.
39. Pantel, P., and Ravichandran, D. 2004. Automatically labeling semantic classes. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology/North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT/NAACL-04), pp. 321-328, Boston, MA, USA.
40. Patwardhan, S. 2003. Incorporating Dictionary and Corpus Information into a Context Vector Measure of Semantic Relatedness. Master's thesis, Palo Alto, CA, USA: University of Minnesota.
41. Pedersen, T., Patwardhan, S., and Michelizzi, J. 2004. Wordnet: Similarity - measuring the relatedness of concepts. In AAAI, pp. 1024-1025, San Jose, CA, USA.
42. Resnik, P. 1995. Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy. In IJCAI'95: Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence, pp. 448-453, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
43. Roberts, M. A. J., and Chater, N. 2008. Using statistical smoothing to estimate the psycholinguistic acceptability of novel phrases. Behavior Research Methods 40(1):84-93.
44. Ruge, G. 1992. Experiments on linguistically-based term associations. Information Processing and Management 28(3):317-332.
45. Sahlgren, M., Holst, A., and Kanerva, P. 2008. Permutations as a means to encode order in word space. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci'08), Washington, DC, USA, pp. 1300-1305.
46. Salton, G., and McGill (eds.) 1983. Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill.
47. Szpektor, I., and Dagan, I. 2008. Learning entailment rules for unary templates. In Proceedings of COLING, Manchester, UK.
48. Szpektor, I., and Dagan, I. 2009. Augmenting WordNet-based inference with argument mapping. In Proceedings of the 2009 Workshop on Applied Textual Inference, Singapore.
49. Szpektor, I., Dagan, I., Bar-Haim, R., and Goldberger, J. 2008. Contextual preferences. In Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT, Columbus, OH, USA, pp. 683-691.
50. Szpektor, I., Shnarch, E., and Dagan, I. 2007. Instance-based evaluation of entailment rule acquisition. In Proceedings of ACL 2007, Prague, Czech Republic.
51. Turney, P. D. 2001. Mining the web for synonyms: Pmi-ir versus lsa on toefl. In EMCL'01: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 491-502, London, UK: Springer-Verlag.
52. Tversky, A. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84:327-352.
53. Voorhees, E. M., and Harman, D. K., (eds.) 1999. The Seventh Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-7), vol. 7. NIST.
54. Weeds, J., and Weir, D. 2003. A general framework for distributional similarity. In Proceedings of EMNLP, Sapporo, Japan.
55. Weeds, J., Weir, D., and McCarthy, D. 2004. Characterising measures of lexical distributional similarity. In Proceedings of COLING, Geneva, Switzerland.
56. Wilcoxon, F. 1945. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1:80-83.
57. Wu, Z. and Palmer, M. 1994. Verb semantics and lexical selection. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Las Cruces, NM, USA, pp. 133-138.
58. Xu, J., and Croft, W. B. 1996. Query expansion using local and global document analysis. In Proceedings of SIGIR, Zurich, Switzerland.
59. Zazo, Á. F., Figuerola, C. G., Alonso Berrocal, J. L., and Rodríguez, E. 2005. Reformulation of queries using similarity thesauri. Information Processing and Management 41(5):1163-1173.
60. Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., and Dagan, I. 2009. Bootstrapping distributional feature vector quality. Journal of Computational Linguistics 35(3).