Measuring distributional similarity in context

EMNLP 2010 - Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1162-1172

  Dinu, Georgiana ^a   Lapata, Mirella ^b  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISTRIBUTIONAL SIMILARITIES; PROBABILISTIC FRAMEWORK; TEXTUAL ENTAILMENT; WORD MEANING; WORD SENSE DISAMBIGUATION; WORD SIMILARITY;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 80053241923     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. David M. Blei, Andrew Y. Ng, and Michael I. Jordan. 2003. Latent Dirichlet Allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993-1022.
2. Daoud Clarke. 2009. Context-theoretic semantics for natural language: an overview. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Geometrical Models of Natural Language Semantics, pages 112-119, Athens, Greece.
3. Scott Deerwester, Susan T. Dumais, George W. Furnas, Thomas, and Richard Harshman. 1990. Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41:391-407.
4. Chris Ding, Tao Li, and Wei Peng. 2008. On the equivalence between non-negative matrix factorization and probabilistic latent semantic indexing. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 52(8):3913-3927.
5. Katrin Erk and Sabastian Padó. 2008. A structured vector space model for word meaning in context. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 897-906, Honolulu, Hawaii.
6. Katrin Erk and Sebastian Padó. 2010. Exemplar-based models for word meaning in context. In Proceedings of the ACL 2010 Conference Short Papers, pages 92-97, Uppsala, Sweden.
7. Lev Finkelstein, Evgeniy Gabrilovich, Yossi Matias, Ehud Rivlin, Zach Solan, Gadi Wolfman, and Eytan Ruppin. 2002. Placing search in context: the concept revisited. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20(1):116-131. (Pubitemid 44642309)
8. Eric Gaussier and Cyril Goutte. 2005. Relation between PLSA and NMF and implications. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 601-602, New York, NY.
9. Gregory Grefenstette. 1994. Explorations in Automatic Thesaurus Discovery. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
10. Thomas L. Griffiths and Mark Steyvers. 2004. Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(Suppl. 1):5228-5235. (Pubitemid 38469131)
11. Thomas Hofmann. 2001. Unsupervised learning by probabilistic latent semantic analysis. Machine Learning, 41(2):177-196. (Pubitemid 32872403)
12. Walter Kintsch. 2001. Predication. Cognitive Science, 25:173-202.
13. Kazuaki Kishida. 2005. Property of average precision and its generalization: An examination of evaluation indicator for information retrieval experiments. NII Technical Report.
14. Thomas K. Landauer and Susan T. Dumais. 1997. A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2):211-240.
15. Daniel D. Lee and H. Sebastian Seung. 2000. Algorithms for non-negative matrix factorization. In NIPS, pages 556-562.
16. Dekang Lin and Patrick Pantel. 2001. Discovery of inference rules for question answering. Natural Language Engineering, 7(4):342-360.
17. Dekang Lin. 1998. Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In Proceedings of the joint Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 768-774, Montréal, Canada.
18. Will Lowe and Scott McDonald. 2000. The direct route: Mediated priming in semantic space. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 675-680, Philadelphia, PA.
19. Kevin Lund and Curt Burgess. 1996. Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical cooccurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 28:203-208. (Pubitemid 126454814)
20. Diana McCarthy and Roberto Navigli. 2007. SemEval-2007 Task 10: English Lexical Substitution Task. In Proceedings of SemEval, pages 48-53, Prague, Czech Republic.
21. Scott McDonald. 2000. Environmental Determinants of Lexical Processing Effort. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.
22. Jeff Mitchell and Mirella Lapata. 2008. Vector-based models of semantic composition. In Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT, pages 236-244, Columbus, Ohio.
23. Jeff Mitchell and Mirella Lapata. 2009. Language models based on semantic composition. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 430-439, Suntec, Singapore.
24. Sebastian Padó and Mirella Lapata. 2007. Dependency-based construction of semantic space models. Computational Linguistics, 33(2):161-199.
25. Ian Porteous, David Newman, Alexander Ihler, Arthur Asuncion, Padhraic Smyth, and Max Welling. 2008. Fast collapsed gibbs sampling for latent Dirichlet allocation. In Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 569-577, New York, NY.
26. Joseph Reisinger and Raymond J. Mooney. 2010. Multi-prototype vector-space models of word meaning. In Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 109-117, Los Angeles, California.
27. G Salton, A Wang, and C Yang. 1975. A vector-space model for information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 18:613-620.
28. Hinrich Schuetze. 1998. Automatic word sense discrimination. Journal of Computational Linguistics, 24:97-123.
29. Stefan Thater, Georgiana Dinu, and Manfred Pinkal. 2009. Ranking paraphrases in context. In Proceedings of the 2009 Workshop on Applied Textual Inference, pages 44-47, Suntec, Singapore.
30. Stefan Thater, Hagen Fürstenau, and Manfred Pinkal. 2010. Contextualizing semantic representations using syntactically enriched vector models. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 948-957, Uppsala, Sweden.
31. Michael E. Tipping and Chris M. Bishop. 1999. Probabilistic principal component analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 61:611-622.
32. Alexander Yeh. 2000. More accurate tests for the statistical significance of result differences. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 947-953, Saarbrücken, Germany.