MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903988268 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33017031

Fast PMI-Based Word Embedding with Efficient Use of Unobserved Patterns

2019· article· en· W2903988268 on OpenAlexaff
Behrouz Haji Soleimani, Stan Matwin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPointwise mutual informationWord (group theory)Computer scienceWord embeddingArtificial intelligenceEmbeddingSimilarity (geometry)PointwiseMargin (machine learning)Natural language processingSemantic similarityKernel (algebra)Latent semantic analysisVocabularyMutual informationMachine learningMathematicsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous word representations that can capture the semantic information in the corpus are the building blocks of many natural language processing tasks. Pre-trained word embeddings are being used for sentiment analysis, text classification, question answering and so on. In this paper, we propose a new word embedding algorithm that works on a smoothed Positive Pointwise Mutual Information (PPMI) matrix which is obtained from the word-word co-occurrence counts. One of our major contributions is to propose an objective function and an optimization framework that exploits the full capacity of “negative examples”, the unobserved or insignificant wordword co-occurrences, in order to push unrelated words away from each other which improves the distribution of words in the latent space. We also propose a kernel similarity measure for the latent space that can effectively calculate the similarities in high dimensions. Moreover, we propose an approximate alternative to our algorithm using a modified Vantage Point tree and reduce the computational complexity of the algorithm to |V |log|V | with respect to the number of words in the vocabulary. We have trained various word embedding algorithms on articles of Wikipedia with 2.1 billion tokens and show that our method outperforms the state-of-the-art in most word similarity tasks by a good margin.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207