Automatic Acquisition of Knowledge About Multiword Predicates
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Human interpretation of natural language relies heavily on cognitive processes involving metaphorical and idiomatic meanings. One area of computational linguistics in which such processes play an important, but largely unaddressed, role is the determination of the properties of multiword predicates (MWPs). MWPs such as give a groan and cut taxes involve metaphorical meaning extensions of highly frequent, and highly polysemous, verbs. Tools for automatically identifying such MWPs, and extracting their lexical and syntactic properties, are crucial to the adequate treatment of text in a computational system, due to the productive nature of MWPs across many languages. This paper gives an overview of our work addressing these issues. We begin by relating linguistic properties of metaphorical uses of verbs to their distributional properties. We devise automatic methods for assessing whether a verb phrase is literal, metaphorical, or idiomatic. Since metaphorical MWPs are generally semi-productive, we also develop computational measures of their individual acceptability and of their productivity over semantically related combinations. Our results demonstrate that combining statistical approaches with linguistic information is beneficial, both for the acquisition of knowledge about metaphorical and idiomatic MWPs, and for the organization of such knowledge in a computational lexicon. 1. Metaphorical Multiword Predicates Metaphor is a powerful aspect of language, enabling creative expression in terms of familiar concepts, usually ones which are easily visualizable (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Johnson, 1987; Nunberg et al., 1994). Indeed, metaphor is such a central part of linguistic competence that many terms, especially multiword expressions, that are currently accepted as “regular” language have their origin in metaphorical uses (Newman, 1996). Some of these expressions are viewed as meaning extensions of their component words, which at least partly contribute their semantics, or a figurative version of their semantics. Others have become idioms with idiosyncratic semantics whose relation to their component words is not obvious (except possibly historically). In particular, it is common across languages for multiword predicates (MWPs) to form around certain high frequency verbs that easily undergo a process of metaphorization (Pauwels, 2000; Newman and Rice, 2004). In their literal uses, these so-called “basic” verbs typically refer to states or acts that are central to human experience (e.g., cut, give, put, sit). Their metaphorical uses yield a range of meaning extensions, exhibited in MWPs such as those in 1(a–d): Proceedings of PACLIC 19, the 19th Asia-Pacific Conference on Language, Information and Computation
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle