Identifying Collocations to Measure Compositionality Shared Task System Description
•Transferir como ODP, PDF•
1 gostou•394 visualizações
The document describes experiments conducted to evaluate measures of association for identifying the compositionality of word pairs. It discusses two hypotheses: 1) word pairs with higher association scores are less compositional, and 2) more frequent word pairs are more compositional. Three systems are described that use different measures of association (t-score, PMI, PMI) to classify word pair compositionality in a shared task. While the t-score performed best at identifying compositionality, PMI and frequency-based measures showed less success.
![My original intent... ,[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (19)
Semelhante a Identifying Collocations to Measure Compositionality Shared Task System Description
Semelhante a Identifying Collocations to Measure Compositionality Shared Task System Description (20)
Mais de University of Minnesota, Duluth
Mais de University of Minnesota, Duluth (20)
Último
Último (20)
Identifying Collocations to Measure Compositionality Shared Task System Description
- 1. Identifying Collocations to Measure Compositionality : Shared Task System Description Ted Pedersen Department of Computer Science University of Minnesota, Duluth http://www.d.umn.edu/~tpederse
- 10. Well suited for shared task
- 13. Pearson's chi-squared test (x2)
- 14. Pointwise Mutual Information (pmi)
- 19. T-score (tscore)
- 22. p(w1) = n_1+ / n_++
- 23. p(w2) = n_+1 / n_++
- 29. Duluth-2 (aka “Coward's Comfort”) : use the measure most distinct from Duluth-1
- 30. Duluth-3 (aka “Why not?”) : three submissions allowed, so why not...
- 31. Rank correlation with fine grained gold standard 2 4 10 tscore 0.1481 0.2114 0.2674 tmi 0.1335 0.1908 0.2361 ll 0.1336 0.1913 0.2358 frequency 0.1865 0.2100 0.2126 ps 0.0992 0.1554 0.1874 x2 0.1157 0.1172 0.1654 phi 0.1253 0.1167 0.1646 jaccard 0.1253 0.1255 0.1602 dice 0.1253 0.1255 0.1602 odds 0.0216 0.0060 0.0257 pmi -0.0241 -0.0145 0.0143 rightFisher -0.1768 -0.0817 0.0740 leftFisher 0.1316 0.0686 -0.0870 twotailed -0.1445 -0.0651 -0.1064
- 32. “So many tests?? I suggested the t-score in 1991...”
- 38. RightFisher and two tailed Fisher had lower correlation, but aren't really suitable for collocation discovery
- 39. PMI has long history of use in collocation discovery …
- 40. “I'm no coward, and I like PMI!”
- 43. Narrow window in Duluth-3 might tend to miss other occurrences of words (outside window)
- 45. In measures of association higher scores mean less literal (at least according to hypothesis 1)
- 47. Binned 0-33 low, 34-66 medium, 67-100 high
- 49. Duluth-2 and Duluth-3 generally less effective for both coarse and numerical scoring
- 52. Scoring of compositionality is less successful
- 54. more frequent word pairs are likely to be compositional