278 research outputs found

    A Survey on Semantic Processing Techniques

    Full text link
    Semantic processing is a fundamental research domain in computational linguistics. In the era of powerful pre-trained language models and large language models, the advancement of research in this domain appears to be decelerating. However, the study of semantics is multi-dimensional in linguistics. The research depth and breadth of computational semantic processing can be largely improved with new technologies. In this survey, we analyzed five semantic processing tasks, e.g., word sense disambiguation, anaphora resolution, named entity recognition, concept extraction, and subjectivity detection. We study relevant theoretical research in these fields, advanced methods, and downstream applications. We connect the surveyed tasks with downstream applications because this may inspire future scholars to fuse these low-level semantic processing tasks with high-level natural language processing tasks. The review of theoretical research may also inspire new tasks and technologies in the semantic processing domain. Finally, we compare the different semantic processing techniques and summarize their technical trends, application trends, and future directions.Comment: Published at Information Fusion, Volume 101, 2024, 101988, ISSN 1566-2535. The equal contribution mark is missed in the published version due to the publication policies. Please contact Prof. Erik Cambria for detail

    CLARIN

    Get PDF
    The book provides a comprehensive overview of the Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure – CLARIN – for the humanities. It covers a broad range of CLARIN language resources and services, its underlying technological infrastructure, the achievements of national consortia, and challenges that CLARIN will tackle in the future. The book is published 10 years after establishing CLARIN as an Europ. Research Infrastructure Consortium

    Context-sensitive interpretation of natural language location descriptions : a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy in Information Technology at Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand

    Get PDF
    People frequently describe the locations of objects using natural language. Location descriptions may be either structured, such as 26 Victoria Street, Auckland, or unstructured. Relative location descriptions (e.g., building near Sky Tower) are a common form of unstructured location description, and use qualitative terms to describe the location of one object relative to another (e.g., near, close to, in, next to). Understanding the meaning of these terms is easy for humans, but much more difficult for machines since the terms are inherently vague and context sensitive. In this thesis, we study the semantics (or meaning) of qualitative, geospatial relation terms, specifically geospatial prepositions. Prepositions are one of the most common forms of geospatial relation term, and they are commonly used to describe the location of objects in the geographic (geospatial) environment, such as rivers, mountains, buildings, and towns. A thorough understanding of the semantics of geospatial relation terms is important because it enables more accurate automated georeferencing of text location descriptions than use of place names only. Location descriptions that use geospatial prepositions are found in social media, web sites, blogs, and academic reports, and georeferencing can allow mapping of health, disaster and biological data that is currently inaccessible to the public. Such descriptions have unstructured format, so, their analysis is not straightforward. The specific research questions that we address are: RQ1. Which geospatial prepositions (or groups of prepositions) and senses are semantically similar? RQ2. Is the role of context important in the interpretation of location descriptions? RQ3. Is the object distance associated with geospatial prepositions across a range of geospatial scenes and scales accurately predictable using machine learning methods? RQ4. Is human annotation a reliable form of annotation for the analysis of location descriptions? To address RQ1, we determine the nature and degree of similarity among geospatial prepositions by analysing data collected with a human subjects experiment, using clustering, extensional mapping and t-stochastic neighbour embedding (t-SNE) plots to form a semantic similarity matrix. In addition to calculating similarity scores among prepositions, we identify the senses of three groups of geospatial prepositions using Venn diagrams, t-sne plots and density-based clustering, and define the relationships between the senses. Furthermore, we use two text mining approaches to identify the degree of similarity among geospatial prepositions: bag of words and GloVe embeddings. By using these methods and further analysis, we identify semantically similar groups of geospatial prepositions including: 1- beside, close to, near, next to, outside and adjacent to; 2- across, over and through and 3- beyond, past, by and off. The prepositions within these groups also share senses. Through is recognised as a specialisation of both across and over. Proximity and adjacency prepositions also have similar senses that express orientation and overlapping relations. Past, off and by share a proximal sense but beyond has a different sense from these, representing on the other side. Another finding is the more frequent use of the preposition close to for pairs of linear objects than near, which is used more frequently for non-linear ones. Also, next to is used to describe proximity more than touching (in contrast to other prepositions like adjacent to). Our application of text mining to identify semantically similar prepositions confirms that a geospatial corpus (NCGL) provides a better representation of the semantics of geospatial prepositions than a general corpus. Also, we found that GloVe embeddings provide adequate semantic similarity measures for more specialised geospatial prepositions, but less so for those that have more generalised applications and multiple senses. We explore the role of context (RQ2) by studying three sites that vary in size, nature, and context in London: Trafalgar Square, Buckingham Palace, and Hyde Park. We use the Google search engine to extract location descriptions that contain these three sites with 9 different geospatial prepositions (in, on, at, next to, close to, adjacent to, near, beside, outside) and calculate their acceptance profiles (the profile of the use of a preposition at different distances from the reference object) and acceptance thresholds (maximum distance from a reference object at which a preposition can acceptably be used). We use these to compare prepositions, and to explore the influence of different contexts. Our results show that near, in and outside are used for larger distances, while beside, adjacent to and at are used for smaller distances. Also, the acceptance threshold for close to is higher than for other proximity/adjacency prepositions such as next to, adjacent to and beside. The acceptance threshold of next to is larger than adjacent to, which confirms the findings in ‎Chapter 2 which identifies next to describing a proximity rather than touching spatial relation. We also found that relatum characteristics such as image schema affect the use of prepositions such as in, on and at. We address RQ3 by developing a machine learning regression model (using the SMOReg algorithm) to predict the distance associated with use of geospatial prepositions in specific expressions. We incorporate a wide range of input variables including the similarity matrix of geospatial prepositions (RQ1); preposition senses; semantic information in the form of embeddings; characteristics of the located and reference objects in the expression including their liquidity/solidity, scale and geometry type and contextual factors such as the density of features of different types in the surrounding area. We evaluate the model on two different datasets with 25% improvement against the best baseline respectively. Finally, we consider the importance of annotation of geospatial location descriptions (RQ4). As annotated data is essential for the successful study of automated interpretation of natural language descriptions, we study the impact and accuracy of human annotation on different geospatial elements. Agreement scores show that human annotators can annotate geospatial relation terms (e.g., geospatial prepositions) with higher agreement than other geospatial elements. This thesis advances understanding of the semantics of geospatial prepositions, particularly considering their semantic similarity and the impact of context on their interpretation. We quantify the semantic similarity of a set of 24 geospatial prepositions; identify senses and the relationships among them for 13 geospatial prepositions; compare the acceptance thresholds of 9 geospatial prepositions and describe the influence of context on them; and demonstrate that richer semantic and contextual information can be incorporated in predictive models to interpret relative geospatial location descriptions more accurately

    CLARIN. The infrastructure for language resources

    Get PDF
    CLARIN, the "Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure", has established itself as a major player in the field of research infrastructures for the humanities. This volume provides a comprehensive overview of the organization, its members, its goals and its functioning, as well as of the tools and resources hosted by the infrastructure. The many contributors representing various fields, from computer science to law to psychology, analyse a wide range of topics, such as the technology behind the CLARIN infrastructure, the use of CLARIN resources in diverse research projects, the achievements of selected national CLARIN consortia, and the challenges that CLARIN has faced and will face in the future. The book will be published in 2022, 10 years after the establishment of CLARIN as a European Research Infrastructure Consortium by the European Commission (Decision 2012/136/EU)

    Proceedings of the Eighth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics CliC-it 2021

    Get PDF
    The eighth edition of the Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it 2021) was held at Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca from 26th to 28th January 2022. After the edition of 2020, which was held in fully virtual mode due to the health emergency related to Covid-19, CLiC-it 2021 represented the first moment for the Italian research community of Computational Linguistics to meet in person after more than one year of full/partial lockdown
    • …
    corecore