dsc 2008 – 26-27 june 2008, thessaloniki, greece automatic acquisition of synonyms using the web...
TRANSCRIPT
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Automatic Acquisition of Synonyms Using
the Web as a Corpus
Svetlin Nakov, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski"
3rd Annual South East European Doctoral Student Conference (DSC2008): Infusing
Knowledge and Research in South East Europe
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Introduction We want to automatically extract all pairs
of synonyms inside given text
Our goal is:
Design an algorithm that can distinguish between synonyms and non-synonyms
Our approach:
Measure semantic similarity using the Web as a corpus
Synonyms are expected to have higher semantic similarity than non-synonyms
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
The Paper in One Slide Measuring semantic similarity
Analyze the words local contexts
Use the Web as a corpus
Similar contexts similar words
TF.IDF weighting & reverse context lookup
Evaluation 94 words (Russian fine arts terminology)
50 synonym pairs to be found
11pt average precision: 63.16%
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity What is local context?
Few words before and after the target word
The words in the local context of given word are semantically related to it
Need to exclude the stop words: prepositions, pronouns, conjunctions, etc.
Stop words appear in all contexts
Need of sufficiently big corpus
Same day delivery of fresh flowers, roses, and unique gift baskets
from our online boutique. Flower delivery online by local florists for
birthday flowers.
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity Web as a corpus
The Web can be used as a corpus to extract the local context for given word
The Web is the largest possible corpus
Contains large corpora in any language
Searching some word in Google can return up to 1 000 snippets of texts
The target word is given along with its local context: few words before and after it
Target language can be specified
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity Web as a corpus
Example: Google query for "flower"
Flowers, Plants, Gift Baskets - 1-800-FLOWERS.COM - Your Florist ...
Flowers, balloons, plants, gift baskets, gourmet food, and teddy bears presented by 1-800-FLOWERS.COM, Your Florist of Choice for over 30 years.
Margarita Flowers - Delivers in Bulgaria for you! - gifts, flowers, roses ...
Wide selection of BOUQUETS, FLORAL ARRANGEMENTS, CHRISTMAS ECORATIONS, PLANTS, CAKES and GIFTS appropriate for various occasions. CREDIT cards acceptable.
Flowers, plants, roses, & gifts. Flowers delivery with fewer ...
Flowers, roses, plants and gift delivery. Order flowers from ProFlowers once, and you will never use flowers delivery from florists again.
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity Measuring semantic similarity
For given two words their local contexts are extracted from the Web
A set of words and their frequencies
Semantic similarity is measured as similarity between these local contexts
Local contexts are represented as frequency vectors for given set of words
Cosine between the frequency vectors in the Euclidean space is calculated
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity Example of context words frequencies
word countfresh 217
order 204
rose 183
delivery 165
gift 124
welcome 98
red 87
... ...
word: flower
word countInternet 291
PC 286
technology 252
order 185
new 174
Web 159
site 146
... ...
word: computer
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Contextual Web Similarity Example of frequency vectors
Similarity = cosine(v1, v2)
# word freq.0 alias 3
1 alligator 2
2 amateur 0
3 apple 5
... ... ...
4999 zap 0
5000 zoo 6
v1: flower
# word freq.0 alias 7
1 alligator 0
2 amateur 8
3 apple 133
... ... ...
4999 zap 3
5000 zoo 0
v2: computer
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
TF.IDF Weighting TF.IDF (term frequency times inverted
document frequency) Statistical measure in information retrieval
Shows how important is a certain word for a given document in a set of documents
Increases proportionally to the number of word's occurrences in the document
Decreases proportionally to the total number of documents containing the word
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Reverse Context Lookup Local context extracted from the Web can
contain arbitrary parasite words like "online", "home", "search", "click", etc.
Internet terms appear in any Web page
Such words are not likely to be associated with the target word
Example (for the word flowers)
"send flowers online", "flowers here", "order flowers here"
Will the word "flowers" appear in the local context of "send", "online" and "here"?
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Reverse Context Lookup If two words are semantically related, then
Both of them should appear in the local contexts of each other
Let #{x,y} = number of occurrences of x in the local context of y
For any word w and a word from its local context wc, we define their strength of semantic association p(w,wc) as follows:
p(w, wc) = min{ #(w, wc), #(wc,w) }
We use p(w, wc) as vector coordinates
We introduce a minimal occurrence threshold (e.g. 5) to filter words appearing just by chance
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Data Set We use a list of 94 Russian words:
Terms extracted from texts in the subject of fine arts
Limited to nouns only
The data set:
There are 50 synonym pairs in these words
We expect to find them by our algorithms
абрис, адгезия, алмаз, алтарь, амулет, асфальт, беломорит, битум, бородки, ваятель, вермильон, ..., шлифовка, штихель, экспрессивность, экспрессия, эстетизм, эстетство
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Experiments We tested few modifications of our
contextual Web similarity algorithm Basic algorithm (without modifications)
TF.IDF weighting
Reverse context lookup with different frequency threshold
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Experiments RAND – random ordering of all the pairs
SIM – the basic algorithm for extraction of semantic similarity from the Web Context size of 3 words
Without analyzing the reverse context
With lemmatization
SIM+TFIDF – modification of the SIM algorithm with TF.IDF weighting
REV2, REV3, REV4, REV5, REV6, REV7 – the SIM algorithm + “reverse context lookup” with frequency thresholds of: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Resources Used We used the following resources:
Google Web search engine: extracted the first 1 000 results for 82 645 Russian words
Russian lemma dictionary: 1 500 000 wordforms and 100 000 lemmata
A list of 507 Russian stop words
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Evaluation Our algorithms arrange all pairs of words
according to their semantic similarity
We expect the 50 synonyms pairs to be at the top of the result list
We count how many synonyms are found in the top N results (e.g. top 5, top 10, etc.)
We measure precision and recall We measure 11pt average precision to
evaluate the results
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
SIM Algorithm – Results
n Word 1 Words 2Semantic Similarity
Syno-nyms
Precision @ n
Recall @ n
1 выжигание пирография 0.433805 yes 100.00% 2%
2 тонирование тонировка 0.382357 yes 100.00% 4%
3 гематит кровавик 0.325138 yes 100.00% 6%
4 подрамок подрамник 0.271659 yes 100.00% 8%
5 оливин перидот 0.252256 yes 100.00% 10%
6 полирование шлифование 0.220559 no 83.33% 10%
7 полировка шлифовка 0.216347 no 71.43% 10%
8 амулет талисман 0.200595 yes 75.00% 12%
9 пластификаторы мягчители 0.170770 yes 77.78% 14%
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
Precision and recall obtained by the SIM algorithm
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Comparison of the Algorithms
Comparison of the algorithms (number of synonyms in the top results)
Algorithm 1 5 10 20 30 40 50 100 200 Max
RAND 0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.1 2.3 50
SIM 1 5 8 15 18 23 25 39 48 50
SIM+TFIDF 1 4 8 16 22 27 29 43 48 50
REV2 1 4 8 16 21 27 32 42 43 46
REV3 1 4 8 16 20 28 32 41 42 46
REV4 1 4 8 15 20 28 33 41 42 45
REV5 1 4 8 15 20 28 33 40 41 42
REV6 1 4 8 15 22 28 32 39 40 42
REV7 1 4 8 15 21 27 30 37 39 40
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Comparison of the Algorithms(11pt Average Precision)
Comparing RAND, SIM, SIM+TDIDF and REV2 … REV7
11pt Average Precision
1,15%
58,98%
63,16%
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
RAND SIM SIM+TFIDF REV2 REV3 REV4 REV5 REV6 REV7
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Results (Precision-Recall Graph)
Comparing the recall-precision graphs of evaluated algorithms
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Discussion Our approach is original because:
Measures automatically semantic similarity
Uses the Web as a corpus
Does not rely on any preexisting corpora
Does not requires semantic resources like WordNet and EuroWordNet
Works for any language
Tested for Bulgarian and Russian
Uses reverse-context lookup and TF.IDF
Significant improvement in quality
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Discussion Good accuracy, but far away from 100% Known problems of the proposed algorithms:
Semantically related words are not always synonyms red – blue wood – pine apple – computer
Similar contexts does not always mean similar words (distributional hypothesis)
The Web as a corpus introduces noise Google returns the first 1 000 results only
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Discussion Known problems of the proposed algorithms:
Google ranks higher news portals, travel agencies and retail sites than books, articles and forum messages
Local context always contain noise Working with words, not capturing phrases
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Conclusion and Future Work Conclusion
Our algorithms can distinguish between synonyms and non-synonyms
Accuracy should be improved
Future Work
Additional techniques to distinguish between synonyms and semantically related words
Improve the semantic similarity measure algorithm
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
References Hearst M. (1991). "Noun Homograph Disambiguation Using Local Context in
Large Text Corpora". In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the University of Waterloo Centre for the New OED and Text Research, Oxford, England, pages 1-22.
Nakov P., Nakov S., Paskaleva E. (2007a). “Improved Word Alignments Using the Web as a Corpus”. In Proceedings of RANLP'2007, pages 400-405, Borovetz, Bulgaria.
Nakov S., Nakov P., Paskaleva E. (2007b). “Cognate or False Friend? Ask the Web!”. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Acquisition and Management of Multilin gual Lexicons, held in conjunction with RANLP'2007, pages 55-62, Borovetz, Bulgaria.
Sparck-Jones K. (1972). “A Statistical Interpretation of Term Specificity and its Application in Retrieval”. Journal of Documentation, volume 28, pages 11-21.
Salton G., McGill M. (1983), Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Paskaleva E. (2002). “Processing Bulgarian and Russian Resources in Unified Format”. In Proceedings of the 8th International Scientific Symposium MAPRIAL, Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria, pages 185-194.
Harris, Z. (1954). "Distributional structure”. Word, 10, pages 146-162. Lin D. (1998). "Automatic Retrieval and Clustering of Similar Words". In
Proceedings of COLING-ACL'98, Montreal, Canada, pages 768-774. Curran J., Moens M. (2002). "Improvements in Аutomatic Тhesaurus
Еxtraction". In Proceedings of the Workshop on Unsupervised Lexical Acquisition, SIGLEX 2002, Philadelphia, USA, pages 59-67.
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
References Plas L., Tiedeman J. (2006). "Finding Synonyms Using Automatic Word
Alignment and Measures of Distribu tional Similarity". In Proceedings of COLING/ACL 2006, Sydney, Australia.
Och F., Ney H. (2003). "A Systematic Comparison of Various Statistical Alignment Models". Computational Linguistics, 29 (1), 2003.
Hagiwara М., Ogawa Y., Toyama K. (2007). "Effectiveness of Indirect Dependency for Automatic Synonym Acquisition". In Proceedings of CoSMo 2007 Workshop, held in conjuction with CONTEXT 2007, Roskilde, Denmark.
Kilgarriff A., Grefenstette G. (2003). "Introduction to the Special Issue on the Web as Corpus", Computational Linguistics, 29(3):333–347.
Inkpen D. (2007). "Near-synonym Choice in an Intelligent Thesaurus". In Proceedings of the NAACL-HLT, New York, USA.
Chen H., Lin M., Wei Y. (2006). "Novel Association Measures Using Web Search with Double Checking". In Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006, Sydney, Australia, pages 1009-1016.
Sahami M., Heilman T. (2006). "A Web-based Kernel Function for Measuring the Similarity of Short Text Snippets". In Proceedings of 15th International World Wide Web Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Bollegala D., Matsuo Y., Ishizuka M. (2007). "Measuring Semantic Similarity between Words Using Web Search Engines", In Proceedings of the 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2007), Banff, Canada, pages 757-766.
Sanchez D., Moreno A. (2005), "Automatic Discovery of Synonyms and Lexicalizations from the Web". Artificial Intelligence Research and Development, Volume 131, 2005.
DSC 2008 – 26-27 June 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece
Questions?
Automatic Acquisition of Synonyms Using the Web as a
Corpus