This portal has been archived. Explore the next generation of this technology.
Word Representations, Tree Models and Syntactic Functions
lib:7184402a92c2248b (v1.0.0)
Authors: Simon Šuster,Gertjan van Noord,Ivan Titov
ArXiv: 1508.07709
Document: PDF DOI
Abstract URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.07709v2
Word representations induced from models with discrete latent variables (e.g.\ HMMs) have been shown to be beneficial in many NLP applications. In this work, we exploit labeled syntactic dependency trees and formalize the induction problem as unsupervised learning of tree-structured hidden Markov models. Syntactic functions are used as additional observed variables in the model, influencing both transition and emission components. Such syntactic information can potentially lead to capturing more fine-grain and functional distinctions between words, which, in turn, may be desirable in many NLP applications. We evaluate the word representations on two tasks -- named entity recognition and semantic frame identification. We observe improvements from exploiting syntactic function information in both cases, and the results rivaling those of state-of-the-art representation learning methods. Additionally, we revisit the relationship between sequential and unlabeled-tree models and find that the advantage of the latter is not self-evident.
ArXiv: 1508.07709
Document: PDF DOI
Abstract URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.07709v2
Word representations induced from models with discrete latent variables (e.g.\ HMMs) have been shown to be beneficial in many NLP applications. In this work, we exploit labeled syntactic dependency trees and formalize the induction problem as unsupervised learning of tree-structured hidden Markov models. Syntactic functions are used as additional observed variables in the model, influencing both transition and emission components. Such syntactic information can potentially lead to capturing more fine-grain and functional distinctions between words, which, in turn, may be desirable in many NLP applications. We evaluate the word representations on two tasks -- named entity recognition and semantic frame identification. We observe improvements from exploiting syntactic function information in both cases, and the results rivaling those of state-of-the-art representation learning methods. Additionally, we revisit the relationship between sequential and unlabeled-tree models and find that the advantage of the latter is not self-evident.
Relevant initiatives
Related knowledge about this paper
Reproduced results (crowd-benchmarking and competitions)
Artifact and reproducibility checklists
- ACM/cTuning artifact appendix and reproducibility checklist
- NeurIPS reproducibility checklist
- SIGPLAN's checklist for empirical evaluation
- Collective Knowledge (organizing research projects based on FAIR principles)