Resnik, P. and Yarowsky, D. (1997) Distinguishing Systems and Distinguishing Senses: New Evaluation Methods for Word Sense Disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering, 5(2), 113-133.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....are sorted according to their frequency in the SemCor corpus. This corpus, which consists of 676,546 words, has been semantically annotated using the senses of WordNet and manually supervised. There has been a wide range of approaches to the WSD problem (a detailed study can be found in [3] and [4]) In general, you can categorize them into knowledge based and corpus based approaches. Under the knowledge based approach the disambiguation process is carried out using information from an explicit lexicon or knowledge base. The lexicon may be a machine readable dictionary, such as the Longman ....

Resnik, P., Yarowsky, D.: Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: new evaluation methods for Word Sense Disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering 6 (2000) 113-133

....Volume XLVI, Number 2, 2001 A NEW ALGORITHM FOR WORD SENSE DISAMBIGUATION DOINA T ATAR AND GABRIELA S ERBAN Abstract. The task of disambiguation is to determine which of the senses of an ambiguous word is invoked in a particular use of the word [3] Starting from the algorithm of Yarowsky [5, 4] and the Naive Bayes Classi er (NBC) algorithm , in this paper we propose an original algorithm which combines their elements. This algorithm preserve the advantage of principles of Yarowsky ( one sense per discourse and one sense per collocation) with the known high performance of the NBC ....

P. Resnik, D. Yarowsky : " Distinguishing Systems and Distinguishing sense: new evaluation methods fot WSD ", Natural Language Engineering, 1 , nr 1, 1998.

....to select the appropriate sense for a different word in each iteration, each word having more than 5 senses in average. Inevitably, the annotator tends to pick up the first sense that seems to fit the context, and this produces a bias in favor of higher ranked senses. Studies on WSD evaluation [RY99, KR00] have argued in favor of a lexical sample task, where the annotator repeatedly annotates occurrences of the same word, reaching a minimal familiarity with the senses of the chosen word. This was the approach taken in SENSEVAL 1, where the Lesk algorithm behaves much better than in this ....

P. Resnik and D. Yarowsky. Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: New evaluation methods for word sense disambiguation 5(2):113--134. Natural Language Engineering, 1999.

....to term semantic categorization that have been fully implemented and experimented on significant test sets. The results achieved in this work demonstrate that term categorization tasks could be integrated within a semi automatic 4 Some limitations of strict evaluation are also pointed out in (Resnik and Yarowski, 1999). terminology acquisition process to provide an active support to terminologists. The solutions to this problem can be considerably improved and we have identified several promising directions for further research. Our experiments show that exogeneous categorization is noticeably the most ....

P. Resnik and D. Yarowski. 1999. Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: new evaluation methods for Word Sens Disambiguation.

No context found.

Resnik, P., Yarowsky, D.: Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: New evaluation methods for word sense disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering 5 (1999) 113-133

No context found.

Philip Resnik and David Yarowsky. Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: New evaluation methods for word sense disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering, 5(2):113-- 133, 1999. 2

....running a task for SENSEVAL 2. These guidelines are based on experience gathered from SENSEVAL 1, which involved individually organized tasks in English (Kilgarriff and Rosenzweig 2000) French (Segond 2000) and Italian (Calzolari and Corazzari 2000) and on the evaluation protocol proposed by Resnik and Yarowsky (1999). Although Resnik and Yarowsky s proposal assumes that a very large corpus is available and that the same type of evaluation is run repeatedly over several years, we suggest that a variation of it be adopted, as outlined below. As these are merely guidelines, if your circumstances require you to ....

....their code. Evaluation data release The other portion of the corpus, with annotations (i.e. the answers) removed. Systems should be instructed to tag every word in the corpus with one or more senses of the inventory, and to return answers in a specified format. This scheme is different from Resnik and Yarowsky s (1999) proposal, which did not permit the test words to be released before the evaluation. Their scheme does not allow supervised systems to participate (at least in the first year that such an evaluation is run) SCORING Scoring involves designing baseline algorithms and scoring methods. The answers ....

Resnik, Philip and David Yarowsky. 1999. Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: new evaluation methods for Word Sense Disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering 5(2):113--134.

No context found.

Resnik, P. and Yarowsky, D. (1997) Distinguishing Systems and Distinguishing Senses: New Evaluation Methods for Word Sense Disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering, 5(2), 113-133.

No context found.

P. Resnik and D. Yarowsky. Distinguishing systems and distinguishing senses: New evaluation methods for word sense disambiguation. Natural Language Engineering, 1999.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC