800 research outputs found

    Basic tasks of sentiment analysis

    Full text link
    Subjectivity detection is the task of identifying objective and subjective sentences. Objective sentences are those which do not exhibit any sentiment. So, it is desired for a sentiment analysis engine to find and separate the objective sentences for further analysis, e.g., polarity detection. In subjective sentences, opinions can often be expressed on one or multiple topics. Aspect extraction is a subtask of sentiment analysis that consists in identifying opinion targets in opinionated text, i.e., in detecting the specific aspects of a product or service the opinion holder is either praising or complaining about

    A Re-ranking Model for Dependency Parser with Recursive Convolutional Neural Network

    Full text link
    In this work, we address the problem to model all the nodes (words or phrases) in a dependency tree with the dense representations. We propose a recursive convolutional neural network (RCNN) architecture to capture syntactic and compositional-semantic representations of phrases and words in a dependency tree. Different with the original recursive neural network, we introduce the convolution and pooling layers, which can model a variety of compositions by the feature maps and choose the most informative compositions by the pooling layers. Based on RCNN, we use a discriminative model to re-rank a kk-best list of candidate dependency parsing trees. The experiments show that RCNN is very effective to improve the state-of-the-art dependency parsing on both English and Chinese datasets

    Neural networks for text matching

    Get PDF

    From Paraphrase Database to Compositional Paraphrase Model and Back

    Full text link
    The Paraphrase Database (PPDB; Ganitkevitch et al., 2013) is an extensive semantic resource, consisting of a list of phrase pairs with (heuristic) confidence estimates. However, it is still unclear how it can best be used, due to the heuristic nature of the confidences and its necessarily incomplete coverage. We propose models to leverage the phrase pairs from the PPDB to build parametric paraphrase models that score paraphrase pairs more accurately than the PPDB's internal scores while simultaneously improving its coverage. They allow for learning phrase embeddings as well as improved word embeddings. Moreover, we introduce two new, manually annotated datasets to evaluate short-phrase paraphrasing models. Using our paraphrase model trained using PPDB, we achieve state-of-the-art results on standard word and bigram similarity tasks and beat strong baselines on our new short phrase paraphrase tasks.Comment: 2015 TACL paper updated with an appendix describing new 300 dimensional embeddings. Submitted 1/2015. Accepted 2/2015. Published 6/201

    ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„์˜ ํ•™์Šต ๋ฐ ๋ถ„์„

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ปดํ“จํ„ฐ๊ณตํ•™๋ถ€, 2021.8. ๊น€ํƒœ์šฑ.๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก (syntax)์€ ์–ธ์–ดํ•™์˜ ํ•œ ๊ฐˆ๋ž˜๋กœ์จ, ์ž์—ฐ์–ด ๋ฌธ์žฅ์˜ ํ˜•์„ฑ ๊ณผ์ •์— ๋‚ดํฌ๋˜์–ด ์žˆ ๋Š” ์›๋ฆฌ์™€ ๊ทธ๋กœ ์ธํ•ด ์ด‰๋ฐœ๋˜๋Š” ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ ์–ธ์–ด์  ํ˜„์ƒ์„ ๊ทœ์ •ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ด๋ฅผ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋Š” ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ถ„์•ผ๋ฅผ ์ด์นญํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์€ ๋‹จ์–ด, ๊ตฌ ๋ฐ ์ ˆ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ๋‚ด์˜ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ ์š”์†Œ๋กœ๋ถ€ํ„ฐ ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ฌธ์žฅ์˜ ์˜๋ฏธ๋ฅผ ์ ์ง„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌ์ถ•ํ•ด ๋‚˜๊ฐ€๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ฒด๊ณ„์ ์ธ ์ด๋ก ์  ์ ˆ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ์ œ๊ณตํ•˜๋ฉฐ, ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ์ด๋Š” ์ž์—ฐ์–ด์ฒ˜๋ฆฌ์—์„œ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„ ํ•™์Šต ๋ฐ ๋ถ„์„์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋ก ์„ ๊ตฌ์ƒํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์žˆ์–ด ํ™œ์šฉ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ž ์žฌ์„ฑ์„ ์ง€๋‹ˆ๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์—์„œ๋Š” ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์˜ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋ก ์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ ์žˆ์–ด ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ๋‘ ์ธก๋ฉด์— ๊ด€ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋…ผํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋จผ์ €, ์–ธ์–ดํ•™์ ์ธ ํŒŒ์Šค ํŠธ๋ฆฌ์˜ ํ˜•ํƒœ๋กœ ํ‘œํ˜„๋˜ ์–ด ์žˆ๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ํ˜น์€ ํƒ€ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ํŒŒ๋ผ๋ฏธํ„ฐ์— ์•”์‹œ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ €์žฅ๋˜์–ด ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์  ์ง€์‹์„ ๋„์ž…ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋” ๋‚˜์€ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„์„ ๋งŒ๋“œ๋Š” ๋ณด๋‹ค ์ง์ ‘์ ์ธ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋ก ์„ ์ œ์‹œํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋”ํ•˜์—ฌ, ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์— ๋ฐ”ํƒ•ํ•œ ๋ฌธ๋ฒ•์  ์ฒด๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ํ•™์Šต์ด ์™„๋ฃŒ๋œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋“ค์˜ ์ž‘๋™ ์›๋ฆฌ๋ฅผ ๊ทœ๋ช…ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ด๋“ค์˜ ๊ฐœ์„ ์ ์„ ์ฐพ๋Š”๋ฐ ๋„์›€์„ ์ค„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ ๋Š” ๋ถ„์„์  ์ ‘๊ทผ๋ฒ• ๋˜ํ•œ ์†Œ๊ฐœํ•œ๋‹ค. ์‹ค์ œ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์—์„œ์˜ ๋‹ค๊ฐ์ ์ธ ์‹คํ—˜๊ณผ ๊ฒ€์ฆ์„ ํ†ตํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ทœ์น™ ๋ฐ ํ†ต๊ณ„ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ž์—ฐ์–ด์ฒ˜๋ฆฌ์—์„œ ๊ท€์ค‘ํ•œ ์ž์›์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ„์ฃผ๋˜์—ˆ๋˜ ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์ด ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์˜ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ๋Œ€์ค‘์ ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ํ˜„์žฌ์˜ ์ž์—ฐ์–ด์ฒ˜๋ฆฌ์—์„œ๋„ ๋ณด์™„์žฌ๋กœ์จ ๊ธฐ๋Šฅํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ๋ณด์ธ๋‹ค. ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์œผ๋กœ, ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์ด ๊ณ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์˜ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ ๋ง ๋ชจ๋ธ ํ˜น์€ ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ•™์Šต ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋ก ์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์žˆ์–ด ํšจ๊ณผ์ ์ธ ์ง๊ด€์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ์‹ค์ฆํ•˜๊ณ , ๋ฌธ์žฅ ํ‘œํ˜„ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์ž์ฒด์ ์œผ๋กœ ํŒŒ์Šค ํŠธ๋ฆฌ๋ฅผ ๋ณต์›ํ•ด๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๋ก ์„ ๋‚ด๋ถ€ ์ž‘๋™ ์ฒด๊ณ„๊ฐ€ ๋ถˆ๋ช…ํ™•ํ•œ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ์ž‘๋™ ์›๋ฆฌ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ดํ•ด๋„๋ฅผ ์ฆ์ง„์‹œํ‚ค๋Š” ๋ถ„์„ ๋„๊ตฌ๋กœ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ๋‹ค.Syntax is a theory in linguistics that deals with the principles underlying the composition of sentences. As this theoretical framework provides formal instructions regarding the procedure of constructing a sentence with its constituents, it has been considered as a valuable reference in sentence representation learning, whose objective is to discover an approach of transforming a sentence into the vector that illustrates its meaning in a computationally tractable manner. This dissertation provides two particular perspectives on harmonizing syntax with neural sentence representation models, especially focusing on constituency grammar. We ๏ฌrst propose two methods for enriching the quality of sentence embeddings by exploiting the syntactic knowledge either represented as explicit parse trees or implicitly stored in neural models. Second, we regard syntactic formalism as a lens through which we reveal the inner workings of pre-trained language models which are state-of-the-art in sentence representation learning. With a series of demonstrations in practical scenarios, we show that syntax is useful even in the neural era where the models trained with huge corpora in an end-to-end manner are prevalent, functioning as either (i) a source of inductive biases that facilitate fast and e๏ฌ€ective learning of such models or (ii) an analytic tool that increases the interpretability of the black-box models.Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Dissertation Outline 5 1.2 Related Publications 6 Chapter 2 Background 8 2.1 Introduction to Syntax 8 2.2 Neural Networks for Sentence Representations 10 2.2.1 Recursive Neural Network 11 2.2.2 Transformer 12 2.2.3 Pre-trained Language Models 14 2.3 Related Literature 16 2.3.1 Sentence Representation Learning 16 2.3.2 Probing Methods for Neural NLP Models 17 2.3.3 Grammar Induction and Unsupervised Parsing 18 Chapter 3 Sentence Representation Learning with Explicit Syntactic Structure 19 3.1 Introduction 19 3.2 Related Work 21 3.3 Method 23 3.3.1 Tree-LSTM 24 3.3.2 Structure-aware Tag Representation 25 3.3.3 Leaf-LSTM 28 3.3.4 SATA Tree-LSTM 29 3.4 Experiments 31 3.4.1 General Con๏ฌgurations 31 3.4.2 Sentence Classi๏ฌcation Tasks 32 3.4.3 Natural Language Inference 35 3.5 Analysis 36 3.5.1 Ablation Study 36 3.5.2 Representation Visualization 38 3.6 Limitations and Future Work 39 3.7 Summary 40 Chapter 4 Sentence Representation Learning with Implicit Syntactic Knowledge 41 4.1 Introduction 41 4.2 Related Work 44 4.3 Method 46 4.3.1 Contrastive Learning with Self-Guidance 47 4.3.2 Learning Objective Optimization 50 4.4 Experiments 52 4.4.1 General Con๏ฌgurations 52 4.4.2 Semantic Textual Similarity Tasks 53 4.4.3 Multilingual STS Tasks 58 4.4.4 SentEval Benchmark 59 4.5 Analysis 60 4.5.1 Ablation Study 60 4.5.2 Robustness to Domain Shifts 61 4.5.3 Computational Efficiency 62 4.5.4 Representation Visualization 63 4.6 Limitations and Future Work 63 4.7 Summary 65 Chapter 5 Syntactic Analysis of Sentence Representation Models 66 5.1 Introduction 66 5.2 Related Work 68 5.3 Motivation 70 5.4 Method 72 5.4.1 CPE-PLM 72 5.4.2 Top-down CPE-PLM 73 5.4.3 Pre-trained Language Models 74 5.4.4 Distance Measure Functions 76 5.4.5 Injecting Bias into Syntactic Distances 77 5.5 Experiments 78 5.5.1 General Con๏ฌgurations 78 5.5.2 Experimental Results on PTB 80 5.5.3 Experimental Results on MNLI 83 5.6 Analysis 85 5.6.1 Performance Comparison by Layer 85 5.6.2 Estimating the Upper Limit of Distance Measure Functions 86 5.6.3 Constituency Tree Examples 88 5.7 Summary 93 Chapter 6 Multilingual Syntactic Analysis with Enhanced Techniques 94 6.1 Introduction 94 6.2 Related work 96 6.3 Method 97 6.3.1 Chart-based CPE-PLM 97 6.3.2 Top-K Ensemble for CPE-PLM 100 6.4 Experiments 100 6.4.1 General Con๏ฌgurations 100 6.4.2 Experiments on Monolingual Settings 102 6.4.3 Experiments on Multilingual Settings 103 6.5 Analysis 106 6.5.1 Factor Correlation Analysis 108 6.5.2 Visualization of Attention Heads 108 6.5.3 Recall Scores on Noun and Verb Phrases 109 6.6 Limitations and Future Work 110 6.7 Summary 111 Chapter 7 Conclusion 112 Bibliography 116 ์ดˆ๋ก 138๋ฐ•

    Syntax-Aware Multi-Sense Word Embeddings for Deep Compositional Models of Meaning

    Full text link
    Deep compositional models of meaning acting on distributional representations of words in order to produce vectors of larger text constituents are evolving to a popular area of NLP research. We detail a compositional distributional framework based on a rich form of word embeddings that aims at facilitating the interactions between words in the context of a sentence. Embeddings and composition layers are jointly learned against a generic objective that enhances the vectors with syntactic information from the surrounding context. Furthermore, each word is associated with a number of senses, the most plausible of which is selected dynamically during the composition process. We evaluate the produced vectors qualitatively and quantitatively with positive results. At the sentence level, the effectiveness of the framework is demonstrated on the MSRPar task, for which we report results within the state-of-the-art range.Comment: Accepted for presentation at EMNLP 201
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore