The impact of selectional preference agreement on semantic relational similarity

Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Semantics, IWCS 2013 - Long Papers

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages

  Rink, Bryan ^a   Harabagiu, Sanda ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

STATISTICS;

ANALOGICAL REASONING; LATENT DIRICHLET ALLOCATIONS; RELATIONAL SIMILARITIES; SELECTIONAL PREFERENCES; SEMANTIC CLASS; SEMANTIC RELATIONS; SINGLE WORDS;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 84943777129     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Baroni, M. and Lenci, A. (2010). Distributional memory: A general framework for corpus-based semantics. Comput. Linguist., 36(4):673-721.
2. Bejar, I. I., Chaffin, R., and Embretson, S. E. (1991). Cognitive and psychometric analysis of analogical problem solving. Recent research in psychology. Springer-Verlag Publishing.
3. Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., and Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993-1022.
4. Davidov, D. and Rappoport, A. (2006). Efficient unsupervised discovery of word categories using symmetric patterns and high frequency words. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 297-304. Association for Computational Linguistics.
5. De Marneffe, M. C. and Manning, C. D. (2008). The Stanford typed dependencies representation. In Coling 2008: Proceedings of the workshop on Cross-Framework and Cross-Domain Parser Evaluation, pages 1-8. Association for Computational Linguistics.
6. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2):155-170.
7. Holyoak, K. and Thagard, P. (1996). Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. MIT press.
8. Jurgens, D. A., Mohammad, S. M., Turney, P. D., Holyoak, and J., K. (2012). SemEval-2012 Task 2: Measuring Degrees of Relational Similarity. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2012).
9. Lin, D. and Pantel, P. (2001). Induction of semantic classes from natural language text. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, KDD '01, pages 317-322, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
10. Liu, Z., Zhang, Y., Chang, E. Y., and Sun, M. (2011). PLDA+: Parallel Latent Dirichlet Allocation with Data Placement and Pipeline Processing. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, special issue on Large Scale Machine Learning.
11. Louviere, J. J. and Woodworth, G. G. (1991). Best-worst scaling: A model for the largest difference judgments. Technical report, Working paper. University of Alberta.
12. Mechura, M. (2008). Selectional Preferences, Corpora and Ontologies. PhD thesis, University of Dublin.
13. Medin, D., Goldstone, R., and Gentner, D. (1990). Similarity involving attributes and relations: Judgments of similarity and difference are not inverses. Psychological Science, 1(1):64-69.
14. O Séaghdha, D. (2010). Latent variable models of selectional preference. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-10), Uppsala, Sweden.
15. Pantel, P. (2003). Clustering by committee. PhD thesis, Citeseer.
16. Pantel, P., Bhagat, R., Coppola, B., Chklovski, T., and Hovy, E. H. (2007). ISP: Learning Inferential Selectional Preferences. In North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 564-571.
17. Parker, R. and Consortium, L. D. (2009). English gigaword fourth edition. Linguistic Data Consortium.
18. Rahman, A. and Ng, V. (2010). Inducing fine-grained semantic classes via hierarchical and collective classification. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, COLING '10, pages 931-939, Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
19. Resnik, P. (1996). Selectional constraints: an information-theoretic model and its computational realization. Cognition, 61(1-2):127-159. Compositional Language Acquisition
20. Rink, B. and Harabagiu, S. (2012). UTD: Determining Relational Similarity Using Lexical Patterns. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2012), in conjunction with the First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (SEM 2012).
21. Ritter, A. and Etzioni, O. (2010). A latent dirichlet allocation method for selectional preferences. In In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL2010.
22. Roark, B. and Charniak, E. (1998). Noun-phrase co-occurrence statistics for semiautomatic semantic lexicon construction. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Computational linguistics-Volume 2, COLING '98, pages 1110-1116, Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
23. Turney, P. D. (2005). Measuring Semantic Similarity by Latent Relational Analysis. In Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence, pages 1136-1141.
24. Turney, P. D. (2006). Similarity of semantic relations. Comput. Linguist., 32(3):379-416.
25. Turney, P. D. (2008). A uniform approach to analogies, synonyms, antonyms, and associations. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics-Volume 1, COLING '08, pages 905-912, Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
26. Widdows, D. and Dorow, B. (2002). A graph model for unsupervised lexical acquisition. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Computational linguistics-Volume 1, pages 1-7. Association for Computational Linguistics.