ASOBEK: Twitter Paraphrase Identification with Simple Overlap Features and SVMs

SemEval 2015 - 9th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, co-located with the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, NAACL-HLT 2015 - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 64-69

  Eyecioglu, Asli ^a   Keller, Bill ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SEMANTICS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

CHARACTER LEVEL; FEATURE-BASED; LEAN TECHNIQUES; N-GRAMS; PARAPHRASE IDENTIFICATIONS; PERFORMANCE; SIMPLE++; SUPPORT VECTORS MACHINE; WORD AND CHARACTERS; WORD LEVEL;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

EID: 85122032657     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Blacoe, W., & Lapata, M. (2012). A Comparison of Vector-based Representations for Semantic Composition. Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL'12), (July), 546-556.
2. Briscoe, E., J. Carroll and R. Watson (2006) The Second Release of the RASP System. In Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006 Interactive Presentation Sessions. Sydney, Australia, 77-80.
3. Callison-burch, C., Koehn, P., & Osborne, M. (2006). Improved Statistical Machine Translation Using Paraphrases. In Proceedings of the main conference on Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL'06). Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 17-24). Stroudsburg, PA, USA
4. Chang, C.C. & Lin, C.J. (2011). LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2:27:1-27:27. Software available at http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm
5. Das, D., & Smith, N. A. (2009). Paraphrase Identification as Probabilistic Quasi-Synchronous Recognition. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP: Volume 1 - Volume 1 (ACL'09), Vol. 1. Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 468-476). Stroudsburg, PA, USA.
6. Derczynski, L., Ritter, A., Clark, S., & Bontcheva, K. (2013). Twitter Part-of-Speech Tagging for All: Overcoming Sparse and Noisy Data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing.
7. Dolan, W. B. & Brockett, C. (2005). Automatically Constructing a Corpus of Sentential Paraphrases, 9-16. In Proceedings of The Third International Workshop on Paraphrasing (IWP2005), Jeju, Republic of Korea.
8. Duclaye, F., Yvon, F., Collin, O., R, F. T., Marzin, P., & Cedex, L. (2002). Using the Web as a Linguistic Resource for Learning Reformulations Automatically. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. (pp. 390-396).
9. Fernando, S., & Stevenson, M. (2008). A Semantic Similarity Approach to Paraphrase Detection. In In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Research Colloquium of the UK Special Interest Group for Computational Linguistics (pp. 45-52).
10. Finch, A., Hwang, Y.-S., & Sumita, E. (2005). Using Machine Translation Evaluation Techniques to Determine Sentence-level Semantic Equivalence. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Paraphrasing (IWP2005) (pp. 17-24).
11. C.-W. Hsu, C.-C. Chang, C.-J. Lin. (2003) A practical guide to support vector classification. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, National Taiwan University. July.
12. Ji, Y., & Eisenstein, J. (2013). Discriminative Improvements to Distributional Sentence Similarity. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 891-896). Seattle, Washington, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Kozareva, Z., & Montoyo, A. (2006). Paraphrase Identification on the Basis of Supervised Machine Learning Techniques. in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Natural Language Processing (FinTAL 2006),Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 524-533). Turku, Finland.
14. Lintean, M., & Rus, V. (2011). Dissimilarity Kernels for Paraphrase Identification. Proceedings of the 24th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. (pp. 263-268). Palm Beach, FL.
15. Madnani, N., Ayan, N. F., Resnik, P., Dorr, B. J., & Park, C. (2007). Using Paraphrases for Parameter Tuning in Statistical Machine Translation. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation (WMT'07). (Vol. 20742). Prague, Czech Republic: Association for Computational Linguistics.
16. Madnani, N., Tetreault, J., & Chodorow, M. (2012). Reexamining Machine Translation Metrics for Paraphrase Identification. In Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL HLT'12) (pp. 182-190). Stroudsburg, PA, USA
17. Malakasiotis, P. (2009). Paraphrase Recognition Using Machine Learning to Combine Similarity Measures. Proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP 2009 Student Research Workshop (pp. 27-35). Suntec, Singapore.
18. Mihalcea, R., Corley, C., & Strapparava, C. (2006). Corpus-based and Knowledge-based Measures of Text Semantic Similarity. In A. Cohn (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st national conference on Artificial intelligence- Volume 1 (pp. 775-780). AAAI Press.
19. Miller, G.A. (1995). WordNet: A Lexical Database for English. Communications of the ACM Vol. 38, No. 11: 39:41.
20. O'Connor, B., Krieger, M., & Ahn, D. (2010). Tweet-Motif: Exploratory Search and Topic Summarization for Twitter. In Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 384-385). Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
21. Owczarzak, K., Gorves, D., Genabith, J. V., & Way, A. (2006). Contextual Bitext-Derived Paraphrases in Automatic MT Evaluation. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation (StatMT'06). Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 86-93). Stroudsburg, PA, USA.
22. Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V.,Thirion, B.,Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., Duchesnay, É. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825-2830
23. Qiu, L., Kan, M.-Y., & Chua, T.-S. (2006). Paraphrase Recognition via Dissimilarity Significance Classification. Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP'06), (July), 18-26. doi:10.3115/1610075.1610079
24. Ritter, A., Clark, S., Mausam & Etzioni, O. (2011). Named entity recognition in tweets: an experimental study. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP'11). Association for Computitional Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 1524-1534.
25. Socher, R., Huang, E. H., Pennington, J., Ng, A. Y., & Manning, C. D. (2011) Dynamic Pooling and Unfolding Recursive Autoencoders for Paraphrase Detection. Science, 1-9.
26. Wan, S., Dras, M., & Dale, R. (2006). Using Dependency-Based Features to Take the “Para-farce” out of Paraphrase. In proceedings of the Australasian Language Technology Workshop (pp. 131-138). Sydney, Australia.
27. Xu, W. (2014). Data-Drive Aprroches for Paraphrasing Across Language Variations. PhD Thesis. Department of Computer Science, New York University.
28. Xu, W., Ritter, A., Callison-Burch, C., Dolan, W., & Ji, Y. (2014). Extracting Lexically Divergent Paraphrases from Twitter. Transactions Of The Association For Computational Linguistics, 2, 435-448. Retrieved fromhttps://tacl2013.cs.columbia.edu/ojs/index.php/tacl/article/view/498
29. Zhang, Y., & Patrick, J. (2005). Paraphrase Identification by Text Canonicalization. In proceedings of the Australasian Language Technology Workshop (pp. 160-166). Sydney, Australia.