MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070354752 · doi:10.1075/ijcl.11.2.04cla

Discovering and organizing noun-verb collocations in specialized corpora using inductive logic programming

2006· article· en· W2070354752 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Claveau, Marie-Claude L’Homme

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Corpus Linguistics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRealization (probability)Natural language processingComputer scienceNounArtificial intelligenceVerbInductive logic programmingRelevance (law)Meaning (existential)LinguisticsParsingMathematicsPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a method for discovering and organizing noun-verb (N-V) combinations found in a French corpus on computing. Our aim is to find N-V combinations in which verbs convey a “realization meaning” as defined in the framework of lexical functions (Mel’čuk 1996, 1998). Our approach, chiefly corpus-based, uses a machine learning technique, namely Inductive Logic Programming (ILP). The whole acquisition process is divided into three steps: (1) isolating contexts in which specific N-V pairs occur; (2) inferring linguistically-motivated rules that reflect the behaviour of realization N-V pairs; (3) projecting these rules on corpora to find other valid N-V pairs. This technique is evaluated in terms of the relevance of the rules inferred and in terms of the quality (recall and precision) of the results. Results obtained show that our approach is able to find these very specific semantic relationships (the realization N-V pairs) with very good success rates.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Corpus LinguisticsSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207