A Broad-Coverage Deep Semantic Lexicon for Verbs

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Broad-Coverage Deep Semantic Lexicon for Verbs Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020), pages 3243–3251 Marseille, 11–16 May 2020 c European Language Resources Association (ELRA), licensed under CC-BY-NC A Broad-Coverage Deep Semantic Lexicon for Verbs James Allen1,2, Hannah An1, Ritwik Bose1, Will de Beaumont2 & Choh Man Teng2 1University of Rochester, 2Institute of Human and Machine Cognition 1Dept. Computer Science, Rochester, NY 14627 USA, 240 S. Alcaniz, Pensacola, FL 32501 USA {jallen,wbeaumont,cmteng}@ihmc.us, {yan2,rbose}@cs.rochester.edu Abstract Progress on deep language understanding is inhibited by the lack of a broad coverage lexicon that connects linguistic behavior to ontological concepts and axioms. We have developed COLLIE-V, a deep lexical resource for verbs, with the coverage of WordNet and syntactic and semantic details that meet or exceed existing resources. Bootstrapping from a hand-built lexicon and ontology, new ontological concepts and lexical entries, together with semantic role preferences and entailment axioms, are automatically derived by combining multiple constraints from parsing dictionary definitions and examples. We evaluated the accuracy of the technique along a number of different dimensions and were able to obtain high accuracy in deriving new concepts and lexical entries. COLLIE-V is publicly available. Keywords: semantic lexicon, ontology concept in the ontology, ONT::DIE, with its own axiom 1. Introduction that says it entails a transition from being alive to being dead. (And further, the concepts of alive and dead are also While there are significant ongoing efforts to develop defined in the ontology). deeper language understanding systems, progress is hampered by the lack of a broad-coverage deep semantic The lexical item kill, on the other hand, is associated with lexicon linked to ontologies that can support reasoning linking templates that relate syntactic realizations to the about commonsense knowledge. By broad-coverage we semantic roles of ONT::KILL (cf. VerbNet frames (Kipper mean that the lexicon substantially covers typical English et al., 2008)). For kill, one template indicates the transitive usage (on the scale of WordNet (Fellbaum, 1998)). By deep use: the subject fills the AGENT role and the direct object we mean that all words are assigned senses that are fills the AFFECTED role. Expressed in VerbNet notation, the organized into an ontology, and that each sense has linking template is associated semantic roles with semantic preferences and AGENT V AFFECTED[+LIVING] syntactic linking templates. By ontology we mean not only Kill also has another template for an intransitive form a hierarchy of concepts with inheritance of properties, but involving just the AGENT role to handle generic statements also axioms that capture the relationships between such as Pesticides kill. concepts, especially temporal and causal relationships for events. Table 1 summarizes many of the currently available lexical resources, none of which meet all the requirements for a We have developed Comprehensive OntoLogy and Lexicon comprehensive resource. WordNet has the most extensive In English (COLLIE), a new resource constructed by coverage, with over 13,000 verb senses with associated bootstrapping from an initial hand-built lexicon and definitions (as natural language glosses) and examples. ontology, and using a semantic parser to read definitions Verbs in WordNet is organized into a hypernym hierarchy automatically from dictionaries to extend the coverage. which is often used as an ontology surrogate. But this Here we report on the verb component (COLLIE-V) which hierarchy is highly incomplete. Specifically, about 550 is the first part of the overall effort to build an extensive verbs have no hypernym (supertype). Still, because of its semantic lexicon. The full COLLIE, including nominal coverage, WordNet is the most widely used resource for concepts and properties, will be released at a later date. semantic information. As an example showing the typical contents of COLLIE-V, VerbNet provides extensive information on semantic roles, consider the entry for one sense of the verb kill, which we linking templates, and causal-temporal axioms for broad will call ONT::KILL. The information about this sense is classes of verbs. However, VerbNet organizes verbs into captured in two places: (1) information in the ontology only 329 verb classes. Because each class covers a wide about the concept ONT::KILL (which contains other verbs range of diverse verbs, VerbNet does not provide a fine- such as murder and slaughter in addition to kill), and (2) grained semantics and the axioms defined for each class are information in the lexicon about the behavior of the verb necessarily quite abstract. For example, abate, gray, kill. hybridize and reverse are all in the same class and share the Looking first at the concept, ONT::KILL is a subconcept same defining axiom. Still, VerbNet represents the state of of ONT::DESTROY, which involves events of destruction. the art in providing axioms related to verbs. ONT::KILL has two core semantic roles, AGENT (playing Propbank (Palmer et al., 2005) is commonly used as a a causal role in the event) and AFFECTED (the object taxonomy of verb senses, and is used in the Abstract affected by the event). Furthermore, the roles are associated Meaning Representation (AMR) (Banarescu et al., 2013). with semantic preferences. For example, the AFFECTED Each entry identifies a set of semantic roles related more to role of ONT::KILL has a preference to apply to entities that syntax than semantics. While Propbank identifies senses can be alive (another concept in the ontology). for individual verbs, it does not group similar verbs that Also associated with ONT::KILL is an axiom that says if X would identify closely related concepts or categorize the kills Y, then X causes Y to die. This involves another senses into an ontology. For instance, PropBank indicates 3243 Lexical Coverage Pros Cons Resource (Verbs; Sense Types; Avg # Senses/Verb) Extensive coverage, hypernym hierarchy, Hypernym hierarchy is only a WordNet 11531; 13782; 2.17 example sentences and templates partial ontology, no axioms Linking templates, semantic roles, Limited coverage, only verbs, no VerbNet 4577; 329; 1.48 selectional restrictions, entailment axioms ontology, classes and axioms are associated with classes highly abstract Propbank/ 2681; 6267; 2.34 Carefully curated senses, examples, Limited coverage, mostly verbs, Ontonotes semantic roles, informal linking templates no axioms or ontology Organized by conceptual frames, semantic Limited coverage, idiosyncratic Framenet 3349; 1086; 1.56 roles, linking templates implicit from semantic roles, no axioms, examples limited ontology Linking templates, semantic roles, TRIPS 2567; 980; 1.21 selectional preferences, fully integrated into Limited coverage, no axioms ontology Linking templates, semantic roles, Some errors due to semi- COLLIE-V 9654; 6516; 2.30 selectional preferences, fully integrated into automatic nature of construction ontology, axioms, extensive coverage Table 1. A comparison of existing lexical resources no relation between similar verbs such as contradict, refute language, involving mostly uninterpreted words and and disagree and no connections between kill and die. phrases and surface relations between them (e.g., is-a- OntoNotes (Weischedel et al., 2011) provides a sense subject-of, is-an-object-of), or a limited number of pre- inventory by grouping WordNet senses with high inter- specified relations organized in a fairly flat hierarchy. In annotator agreement. PropBank frames are linked to addition, information extraction tends to focus more on OntoNotes senses. Some of the OntoNotes senses are learning facts (e.g., Rome is the capital of Italy) rather than further clustered into the Omega 5 ontology. However, conceptual knowledge (e.g., kill means cause to die). This many of the verb senses and most of the PropBank frames work does not address the central goal of this paper, namely are not mapped to the ontology. For instance, Omega 5 building a rich semantic lexicon and associated ontology. contains entries for disagree, but not contradict or refute. As just mentioned, this paper describes a comprehensive Similarly it contains kill but not die. verb resource linked to an event ontology. We describe how Framenet (Baker et al., 1998) organizes its lexicon around the resource was built semi-automatically, by conceptual frames capturing everyday knowledge of bootstrapping from hand-built existing resources, applying events. While it provides informal definitions of these multiple consistency and validity tests, with some human classes, there are no axioms. In addition, unlike the other post correction and reprocessing to eliminate errors. The resources, the semantic roles in Framenet are idiosyncratic resource is publicly available in several different formats. to each class. TRIPS provides detailed lexical information integrated 2. The Bootstrapping System with an ontology. It uses a principled set of semantic roles The core idea is to start with an initial lexicon and ontology, (Allen & Teng, 2018) with selectional preferences and iteratively expand to full coverage by parsing word expressed in the ontology, as well as linking templates. The sense definitions. We chose the TRIPS lexicon and main weaknesses are the coverage and the lack of axioms. ontology as the starting point partly because of the A significant advantage of TRIPS is that it is connected
Recommended publications
  • Lexical Semantics I
    Semantic Theory: Lexical Semantics I Summer 2007 M.Pinkal/ S. Thater • 03-07-07 Lecture: Lexical Semantics I • 05-07-07 Lecture: Lexical Semantics II • 10-07-07 Lecture: Everything else • 12-07-07 Exercise: lexical Semantics • 17-07-07 Question time, Sample exam • 19-07-07 Individual question time • 25-07-07 Final exam, 11:00 (s.t.) Semantic Theory, SS 2007 © M. Pinkal, S. Thater 2 Structure of this course • Sentence semantics • Discourse semantics • Lexical semantics Semantic Theory, SS 2007 © M. Pinkal, S. Thater 3 Dolphins in First-order Logic Dolphins are mammals, not fish. !d (dolphin'(d)"mammal'(d) #¬fish'(d)) Dolphins live-in pods. !d (dolphin'(d)" $x (pod'(p)live-in'(d,p)) Dolphins give birth to one baby at a time. !d (dolphin'(d)" !x !y !t (give-birth-to' (d,x,t)give-birth-to' (d,y,t) " x=y) Semantic Theory, SS 2007 © M. Pinkal, S. Thater 4 Dolphins in First-order Logic Dolphins are mammals, not fish. !d (dolphin'(d)"mammal'(d) #¬fish'(d)) Dolphins live-in pods. !d (dolphin'(d)" $x (pod'(p)live-in'(d,p)) Dolphins give birth to one baby at a time. !d (dolphin'(d)" !x !y !t (give-birth-to' (d,x,t)give-birth-to' (d,y,t) " x=y) Semantic Theory, SS 2007 © M. Pinkal, S. Thater 5 The dolphin text Dolphins are mammals, not fish. They are warm blooded like man, and give birth to one baby called a calf at a time. At birth a bottlenose dolphin calf is about 90-130 cms long and will grow to approx.
    [Show full text]
  • LEXADV - a Multilingual Semantic Lexicon for Adverbs
    LEXADV - a multilingual semantic Lexicon for Adverbs Sanni Nimb Center for Sprogteknologi (CST) – Københavns Universitet Njalsgade 80, Copenhagen, Denmark [email protected] Abstract The LEXADV-project is a Scandinavian research project (2004-2006, financed by Nordplus Sprog) with the aim of extending three Scandinavian semantic lexicons building on the SIMPLE lexicon model (Lenci et al., 2000) with the word class of adverbs. In the lexicons of approx. 400 Danish, Norwegian and Swedish adverbs the different senses are described with a semantic type and a set of semantic features. A classification covering the many meanings that adverbs can have has been established and integrated in the original SIMPLE ontology. Similarly new features have been added to the model in order to describe the adverb senses. The working method of the project builds on the fact that the vocabularies of Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are closely related. An encoding tool has been developed with the special purpose of permitting easy transfer of semantic types and features between entries in the three languages. The Danish adverb senses have been described first, based on the definition in a modern, comprehensive Danish dictionary. Afterwards the lemmas have been translated and the semantic data have been copied into the Swedish as well as into the Norwegian equivalent entry. Finally these copies have been evaluated and when necessary adjusted by native speakers. ’Telic’, ’Agentive’ and ’Constitutive’ has been extended 1. The Scandinavian SIMPLE Lexicons with three more semantic types. The first one, ’Functional’, covers adverb senses of 1.1. Background which the meaning must be described by logic expressions referring to sets, either in the context or in The Danish and the Swedish SIMPLE lexicons are the discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Semantic Lexicon and Similarity Measure in Bangla
    A New Semantic Lexicon and Similarity Measure in Bangla Manjira Sinha, Abhik Jana, Tirthankar Dasgupta, Anupam Basu Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur {manjira87, abhikjana1, iamtirthankar, anupambas}@gmail.com ABSTRACT The Mental Lexicon (ML) refers to the organization of lexical entries of a language in the human mind.A clear knowledge of the structure of ML will help us to understand how the human brain processes language. The knowledge of semantic association among the words in ML is essential to many applications. Although, there are works on the representation of lexical entries based on their semantic association in the form of a lexicon in English and other languages, such works of Bangla is in a nascent stage. In this paper, we have proposed a distinct lexical organization based on semantic association between Bangla words which can be accessed efficiently by different applications. We have developed a novel approach of measuring the semantic similarity between words and verified it against user study. Further, a GUI has been designed for easy and efficient access. KEYWORDS : Bangla Lexicon, Synset, Semantic Similarity, Hierarchical Graph 1 Introduction The lexicon of a language is a collection of lexical entries consisting of information regarding words and expressions, comprising both form and meaning (Levelt,). Form refers to the orthography, phonology and morphology of the lexical item and Meaning refers to its syntactic and semantic information. The term Mental Lexicon refers to the organization and interaction of lexical entries of a language in the human mind. Depending on the definition of word , an adult knows and uses around 40000 to 150000 words.
    [Show full text]
  • The Diachronic Semantic Lexicon of Dutch As Linked Open Data
    The Diachronic Semantic Lexicon of Dutch as Linked Open Data Katrien Depuydt, Jesse de Does Instituut voor de Nederlandse Taal Rapenburg 61, 2311GJ Leiden, The Netherlands [email protected], [email protected] Abstract This paper describes the Linked Open Data (LOD) model for the diachronic semantic lexicon DiaMaNT, currently under development at the Instituut voor de Nederlandse Taal (INT; Dutch Language Institute). The lexicon is part of a digital historical language infrastructure for Dutch at INT. This infrastructure, for which the core data is formed by the four major historical dictionaries of Dutch covering Dutch language from ca. 500 - ca 1976, currently consists of three modules: a dictionary portal, giving access to the historical dictionaries, a computational lexicon GiGaNT, providing information on words, their inflectional and spelling variation, and DiaMaNT, aimed at providing information on diachronic lexical variation (both semasiological and onomasiological). The DiaMaNT lexicon is built by adding a semantic layer to the word form lexicon GiGaNT, using the semantic information in the historical dictionaries. Ontolex-Lemon is a good point of departure for the LOD model, but we need extensions to be able to deal with the historical dictionary content incorporated in our lexicon. Keywords: Linked Open Data, Ontolex, Diachronic Lexicon, Semantic Lexicon, Historical Lexicography, Language Resources 1. Background digital, based on a closed corpus, in digital format. Hav- Even though Dutch lexicography1 can be dated back to the ing four scholarly dictionaries of Dutch in digital format 13th century with the glossarium Bernense, a Latin-Middle opened up opportunities for further exploitation of the con- Dutch word list, we had to wait until the 19th century for tents of these dictionaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Language Processing
    Chowdhury, G. (2003) Natural language processing. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37. pp. 51-89. ISSN 0066-4200 http://eprints.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/2611/ This is an author-produced version of a paper published in The Annual Review of Information Science and Technology ISSN 0066-4200 . This version has been peer-reviewed, but does not include the final publisher proof corrections, published layout, or pagination. Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in Strathprints to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the url (http://eprints.cdlr.strath.ac.uk) of the Strathprints website. Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to The Strathprints Administrator: [email protected] Natural Language Processing Gobinda G. Chowdhury Dept. of Computer and Information Sciences University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XH, UK e-mail: [email protected] Introduction Natural Language Processing (NLP) is an area of research and application that explores how computers can be used to understand and manipulate natural language text or speech to do useful things. NLP researchers aim to gather knowledge on how human beings understand and use language so that appropriate tools and techniques can be developed to make computer systems understand and manipulate natural languages to perform the desired tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Linking Wordnet to the SIL Semantic Domains
    Bringing together over- and under-represented languages: Linking Wordnet to the SIL Semantic Domains Muhammad Zulhelmy bin Mohd Rosman Francis Bond and Frantisekˇ Kratochv´ıl Linguistics and Multilingual Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract English, Japanese and Finnish (Bond and Paik, 2012). We have created an open-source mapping SD is designed for rapid construction and in- between the SIL’s semantic domains (used tuitive organization of lexicons, not primarily for for rapid lexicon building and organiza- the analysis of the resulting data. As a result, tion for under-resourced languages) and many potentially interesting relationships are only WordNet, the standard resource for lexical implicitly realized. By linking SD to WN we semantics in natural language processing. can take advantage of the relationships modeled in We show that the resources complement WN to make more of these explicit. For example, each other, and suggest ways in which the the semantic relations in WN would be a useful mapping can be improved even further. input into SD while the domains hierarchy would The semantic domains give more general enforce the existing WN relations. This will al- domain and associative links, which word- low more quantitative computational modeling of net still has few of, while wordnet gives under-resourced languages. explicit semantic relations between senses, It is currently an exciting time for field lexicog- which the domains lack. raphy with better tools and hardware allowing for rapid digitization of lexical resources. Typically, 1 Introduction linguists tag text soon after they collect it.
    [Show full text]
  • Semanticnet-Perception of Human Pragmatics
    SemanticNet-Perception of Human Pragmatics Amitava Das 1 and Sivaji Bandyopadhyay 2 Department of Computer Science and Engineering Jadavpur University [email protected] 1 [email protected] 2 technical. It is often used in ordinary language Abstract to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation. SemanticNet is a semantic network of We studied with various Psycholinguistics ex- lexicons to hold human pragmatic periments to understand how human natural knowledge. So far Natural Language intelligence helps to understand general se- Processing (NLP) research patronized mantic from nature. Our study was to under- much of manually augmented lexicon stand the human psychology about semantics resources such as WordNet. But the beyond language. We were haunting for the small set of semantic relations like intellectual structure of the psychological and Hypernym, Holonym, Meronym and neurobiological factors that enable humans to Synonym etc are very narrow to cap- acquire, use, comprehend and produce natural ture the wide variations human cogni- languages. Let’s come with an example of tive knowledge. But no such informa- simple conversation about movie between two tion could be retrieved from available persons. lexicon resources. SemanticNet is the Person A: Have you seen the attempt to capture wide range of con- movie ‘ No Man's Land’? How text dependent semantic inference is it? among various themes which human Person B: Although it is beings perceive in their pragmatic good but you should see knowledge, learned by day to day cog- ‘The Hurt Locker’? nitive interactions with the surrounding May be the conversation looks very casual, physical world.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Choices for Lexical Semantics
    1 Ten Choices for Lexical Semantics Sergei Nirenburg and Victor Raskin1 Computing Research Laboratory New Mexico State University Las Cruces, NM 88003 {sergei,raskin}@crl.nmsu.edu Abstract. The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its de- velopment when it has become necessary to define the premises and goals of each of its several current trends. This paper proposes ten choices in terms of which these premises and goals can be discussed. It argues that the central questions in- clude the use of lexical rules for generating word senses; the role of syntax, prag- matics, and formal semantics in the specification of lexical meaning; the use of a world model, or ontology, as the organizing principle for lexical-semantic descrip- tions; the use of rules with limited scope; the relation between static and dynamic resources; the commitment to descriptive coverage; the trade-off between general- ization and idiosyncracy; and, finally, the adherence to the “supply-side” (method- oriented) or “demand-side” (task-oriented) ideology of research. The discussion is inspired by, but not limited to, the comparison between the generative lexicon ap- proach and the ontological semantic approach to lexical semantics. It is fair to say that lexical semantics, the study of word meaning and of its representation in the lexicon, experienced a powerful resurgence within the last decade.2 Traditionally, linguistic se- mantics has concerned itself with two areas, word meaning and sentence meaning. After the ascen- dancy of logic in the 1930s and especially after “the Chomskian revolution” of the late 1950s-early 1960s, most semanticists, including those working in the transformational and post-transforma- tional paradigm, focused almost exclusively on sentence meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • Filling Knowledge Gaps in a Broad-Coverage Machine Translation System*
    Filling Knowledge Gaps in a Broad-Coverage Machine Translation System* Kevin Knight, Ishwar Chander, Matthew Haines, Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou, Eduard Hovy, Masayo Lda, Steve K Luk, Richard Whitney, Kenji Yamada USC/Infonnation Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Manna del Rey, CA 90292 Abstract may be an unknown word, a missing grammar rule, a missing piece of world knowledge, etc A system can be Knowledge-based machine translation (KBMT) designed to respond to knowledge gaps in any number of techniques yield high quabty in domuoH with de• ways It may signal an error It may make a default or tailed semantic models, limited vocabulary, and random decision It may appeal to a human operator controlled input grammar Scaling up along these It may give up and turn over processing to a simpler, dimensions means acquiring large knowledge re• more robust MT program Our strategy is to use pro• sources It also means behaving reasonably when grams (sometimes statistical ones) that can operate on definitive knowledge is not yet available This pa more readily available data and effectively address par per describes how we can fill various KBMT know] ticular classes of KBMT knowledge gaps This gives us edge gap*, often using robust statistical techniques robust throughput and better quality than that of de• We describe quantitative and qualitative results fault decisions It also gives us a platform on which to from JAPANGLOSS, a broad-coverage Japanese- build and test knowledge bases that will product further English MT system improvements in quality
    [Show full text]
  • Approaches for Natural Language Processing (NLP)
    Approaches for Natural Language Processing (NLP) Thierry Hamon Institut Galil´ee- Universit´eParis 13,Villetaneuse, France & LIMSI-CNRS, Orsay, France [email protected] http://perso.limsi.fr/hamon/ March 2014 ERASMUS Mobility - M¨alardalen University (MDH) - V¨aster˚as- Sweden Thierry Hamon (LIMSI & Paris Nord) NLP Approaches March 2014 1 / 126 Introduction Plan Word and sentence segmentation Morphological analysis Parsing of texts Semantic analysis Thierry Hamon (LIMSI & Paris Nord) NLP Approaches March 2014 2 / 126 Segmentation Word and sentence segmentation Thierry Hamon (LIMSI & Paris Nord) NLP Approaches March 2014 3 / 126 Segmentation Introduction (1) Text: a set of characters (string) Segmentation of textual data: identification of a sublist of characters (substring) as a linguistic unit (word, sentence, phrase, term) But it is (very) difficult to define precisely a linguistic unit Linguistic unit identification: the first main step for the natural language processing Several further tasks depend on its quality: content analysis, indexing, part-of-speech tagging, multilingual alignment, etc. Thierry Hamon (LIMSI & Paris Nord) NLP Approaches March 2014 4 / 126 Segmentation Introduction (2) Why word and sentence segmentation? sentences: most of the grammars describe sentences words: basic information provided by dictionaries NB: Words can be simple (book) or complex/compound (French fries, spare time, one-way) Identification of two types of units: units with regular structure (punctuation, number, date, bibliographical references, etc. Units requiring a morphological analysis Thierry Hamon (LIMSI & Paris Nord) NLP Approaches March 2014 5 / 126 Segmentation Example 1: Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2003 Aug;67(8):1825-7. Related Articles, Links Comparative Analyses of Hairpin Substrate Recognition by Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis Ribonuclease P Ribozymes.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Acquiring Case Indexing Taxonomies from Text
    Towards Acquiring Case Indexing Taxonomies From Text Kalyan Moy Gupta1, 2 and David W. Aha2 1ITT Industries; AES Division; Alexandria, VA 22303 2Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence; Naval Research Laboratory (Code 5515); Washington, DC 20375 [email protected] Abstract this feature acquisition problem has not been addressed Taxonomic case-based reasoning is a conversational case- previously. The problem is further compounded by based reasoning methodology that employs feature Taxonomic CBR's need to organize features into subsumption taxonomies for incremental case retrieval. subsumption taxonomies (Gupta 2001). Fortunately, this Although this approach has several benefits over standard feature acquisition and organization problem can be retrieval approaches, methods for automatically acquiring addressed by knowledge extraction techniques (Cowie and these taxonomies from text documents do not exist, which Lehnert 1996), which aim to deduce knowledge artifacts limits its widespread implementation. To accelerate and such as rules, cases, and domain models from text. simplify feature acquisition and case indexing, we introduce However, knowledge extraction involves significantly more FACIT, a domain independent framework that combines deep natural language processing techniques and generative complex natural language processing (NLP) methods than lexicons to semi-automatically acquire case indexing do traditional information extraction (IE) approaches. taxonomies from text documents. FACIT employs a novel In this paper, we introduce knowledge extraction method to generate a logical form representation of text, and methodologies in the form of a domain independent uses it to automatically extract and organize features. In framework for feature acquisition and case indexing from contrast to standard information extraction approaches, text (FACIT).
    [Show full text]
  • A Semantic Approach for Extracting Domain Taxonomies from Text
    A Semantic Approach for Extracting Domain Taxonomies from Text Kevin Meijer, Flavius Frasincar∗, Frederik Hogenboom Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, NL-3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands Abstract In this paper we present a framework for the automatic building of a domain taxonomy from text corpora, called Automatic Taxonomy Construction from Text (ATCT). This framework comprises four steps. First, terms are extracted from a corpus of documents. From these extracted terms the ones that are most relevant for a specific domain are selected using a filtering approach in the second step. Third, the selected terms are disambiguated by means of a word sense disambiguation technique and concepts are generated. In the final step, the broader-narrower relations between concepts are determined using a subsumption technique that makes use of concept co-occurrences in text. For evaluation, we assess the performance of the ATCT framework using the semantic precision, semantic recall, and the taxonomic F-measure that take into account the concept semantics. The proposed framework is evaluated in the field of economics and management as well as the medical domain. Keywords: Taxonomy learning, word sense disambiguation, term extraction, subsumption method, semantic taxonomy evaluation 1. Introduction edge is required [5, 13]. Even if the required knowledge is available, it remains a tedious task to organize a high num- In a world where the amount of digital data grows over more ber of concepts in a proper manner. Therefore it is interest- than 50% per year, any means to structure this data becomes in- ing to find ways to automatically build taxonomies [40].
    [Show full text]