Generalized Probabilistic Topic and Syntax Models for Natural Language Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis proposes a generalized probabilistic approach to modelling document collections along the combined axes of both semantics and syntax. Probabilistic topic (or semantic) models view documents as random mixtures of unobserved latent topics which are themselves represented as probabilistic distributions over words. They have grown immensely in popularity since the introduction of the original topic model, Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), in 2004, and have seen successes in computational linguistics, bioinformatics, political science, and many other fields. Furthermore, the modular nature of topic models allows them to be extended and adapted to specific tasks with relative ease. Despite the recorded successes, however, there remains a gap in combining axes of information from different sources and in developing models that are as useful as possible for specific applications, particularly in Natural Language Processing (NLP). The main contributions of this thesis are two-fold. First, we present generalized probabilistic models (both parametric and nonparametric) that are semantically and syntactically coherent and contain many simpler probabilistic models as special cases. Our models are consistent along both axes of word information in that an LDA-like component sorts words that are semantically related into distinct topics and a Hidden Markov Model (HMM)-like component determines the syntactic parts-of-speech of words so that we can group words that are both semantically and syntactically affiliated in an unsupervised manner, leading to such groups as verbs about health care and nouns about sports. Second, we apply our generalized probabilistic models to two NLP tasks. Specifically, we present new approaches to automatic text summarization and unsupervised part-of-speech (POS) tagging using our models and report results commensurate with the state-of-the-art in these two sub-fields. Our successes demonstrate the general applicability of our modelling techniques to important areas in computational linguistics and NLP.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".