Inductive probabilistic taxonomy learning using singular value decomposition

Natural Language Engineering

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 71-94

  Fallucchi, Francesca ^a   Zanzotto, Fabio Massimo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE AREA; FEATURE SELECTION; FORMAL MODEL; KNOWLEDGE REPOSITORY; LEARNING MODELS; LEXICO-SYNTACTIC PATTERNS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS; PROBABILISTIC METHODS; PROBABILISTIC MODELS; SEMANTIC RELATIONS; SPACE DIMENSIONS; TEXT COLLECTION; UNSUPERVISED FEATURE SELECTION; UNSUPERVISED METHOD; VECTOR SPACE MODELS; WORD MEANING;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; FEATURE EXTRACTION; FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS; SYNTACTICS; TAXONOMIES; VECTOR SPACES;

SINGULAR VALUE DECOMPOSITION;

EID: 79957450009     PISSN: 13513249     EISSN: 14698110     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1351324910000197     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Agirre, E., and Rigau, G. 1996. Word sense disambiguation using conceptual density. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computational linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, pp. 16-22.
2. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
3. Baroni, M., Bernardini, S., Ferraresi, A., and Zanchetta, E. 2009. The wacky wide web: a collection of very large linguistically processed web-crawled corpora. Language Resources and Evaluation 43(Part 3): 209-226.
4. Caron, D., Hospital, W., and Corey, P. N. 1988. Variance estimation of linear regression coefficients in complex sampling situation. In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, pp. 688-694.
5. Chklovski, T., and Pantel, P. 2004. VerbOCEAN: mining the web for fine-grained semantic verb relations. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Barcellona, Spain.
6. Cimiano, P., Hotho, A., and Staab, S. 2005. Learning concept hierarchies from text corpora using formal concept analysis. Journal of Artificial Intelligence research 24: 305-339. (Pubitemid 43130939)
7. Clark, P., Fellbaum, C., and Hobbs, J. 2008. Using and extending wordnet to support question-answering. In Proceedings of Fourth Global WordNet Conference (GWC'08), January 2008, Szeged, Hungary.
8. Corley, C., and Mihalcea, R. 2005. Measuring the semantic similarity of texts. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Empirical Modeling of Semantic Equivalence and Entailment, Ann Arbor, Michigan, June 2005, pp. 13-18. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
9. Cortes, C., and Vapnik, V. 1995. Support vector networks. Machine Learning 20: 1-25.
10. Cox, D. R. 1958. The regression analysis of binary sequences. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 20(2): 215-242.
11. Dhillon, I. S., Mallela, S., Guyon, I., and Elisseeff, A. 2003. A divisive information-theoretic feature clustering algorithm for text classification. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3: 2003.
12. Geffet, M., and Dagan, I. 2005. The distributional inclusion hypotheses and lexical entailment. In ACL '05: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, pp. 107-114. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Golub, G., and Kahan, W. 1965. Calculating the singular values and pseudo-inverse of a matrix. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Series B: Numerical Analysis 2(2): 205-224.
14. Guyon, I., and Elisseeff, A. 2003, March. An introduction to variable and feature selection. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3: 1157-1182.
15. Harris, Z. 1964. Distributional structure. In J. J. Katz and J. A. Fodor (eds.), The Philosophy of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Hearst, M. A. 1992. Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (CoLing-92), Nantes, France.
17. Kahn, J., Linial, N., and Samorodnitsky, A. 1993. Inclusion-exclusion: exact and approximate. Combinatorica 16: 465-477. (Pubitemid 126324260)
18. Lapata, M., and Keller, F. 2004. The web as a baseline: evaluating the performance of unsupervised web-based models for a range of nlp tasks. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Boston, MA.
19. Lin, D., and Pantel, P. 2001. DIRT-discovery of inference rules from text. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD-01), San Francisco, CA.
20. Liu, B. 2007. Web Data Mining: Exploring Hyperlinks, Contents and Usage Data. New York: Springer: Data-Centric Systems and Applications.
21. Maedche, A., and Staab, S. 2002. Measuring similarity between ontologies. In EKAW '02: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Ontologies and the Semantic Web, pp. 251-263. London, UK: Springer-Verlag.
22. McCarthy, D., Koeling, R., Weeds, J., and Carroll, J. 2004. Finding predominant word senses in untagged text. In ACL '04: Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, p. 279. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
23. Medche, A. 2002. Ontology Learning for the Semantic Web of Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 665. London: Kluwer International.
24. Miller, G. A. 1995, November. WordNet: a lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM 38(11): 39-41.
25. Morin, E. 1999. Extraction de liensśemantiques entre termes ̀a partir de corpus de textes techniques. Ph.D. thesis, Faculté des Sciences et de Techniques, Univesité de Nantes, Nantes, France.
26. Navigli, R., and Velardi, P. 2004. Learning domain ontologies from document warehouses and dedicated web sites. Computer Linguistics 30(2): 151-179.
27. Nelder, J. A., and Wedderburn, R. W. M. 1972. Generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) 135(3): 370-384.
28. Padó, S. 2006. User's guide to sigf: significance testing by approximate randomisation. http://www.nlpado.de/∼sebastian/sigf.html.
29. Pantel, P., and Pennacchiotti, M. 2006. Espresso: leveraging generic patterns for automatically harvesting semantic relations. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sydney, Australia, July 2006, pp. 113-120. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
30. Pekar, V., and Staab, S. 2002. Taxonomy learning: factoring the structure of a taxonomy into a semantic classification decision. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Conference on Computational Linguistics 2: 786-792.
31. Penrose, R. 1955. A generalized inverse for matrices. In Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society (1955), 51: 406-413.
32. Ravichandran, D., and Hovy, E. 2002. Learning surface text patterns for a question answering system. In Proceedings of the 40th ACL Meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsilvania.
33. Resnik, P. 1993. Selection and Information: A Class-Based Approach to Lexical Relationships. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
34. Robison, H. R. 1970. Computer-detectable semantic structures. Information Storage and Retrieval 6(3): 273-288.
35. Snow, R., Jurafsky, D., and Ng, A. Y. 2006. Semantic taxonomy induction from heterogenous evidence. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Sydney, July 2006, pp. 801-808.
36. Szpektor, I., Tanev, H., Dagan, I., and Coppola, B. 2004. Scaling web-based acquisition of entailment relations. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Barcellona, Spain.
37. Toumouth, A., Lehireche, A., Widdows, D., and Malki, M. 2006. Adapting wordnet to the medical domain using lexicosyntactic patterns in the ohsumed corpus. In AICCSA '06: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 1029-1036. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
38. Yeh, A. 2000. More accurate tests for the statistical significance of result differences. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, pp. 947-953. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
39. Yoshida, K., Tsuruoka, Y., Miyao, Y., and Tsujii, J. 2007. Ambiguous part-of-speech tagging for improving accuracy and domain portability of syntactic parsers. In M. M. Veloso (ed.), IJCAI, pp. 1783-1788.
40. Zanzotto, F. M., Pennacchiotti, M., and Moschitti, A. 2009. A machine learning approach to textual entailment recognition. Journal of Natural Language Engineering 15-04: 551-582.
41. Zanzotto, F. M., Pennacchiotti, M., and Pazienza, M. T. 2006. Discovering asymmetric entailment relations between verbs using selectional preferences. In ACL-44: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, July 2006, pp. 849-856. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.