Augmenting Named Entity Recognition with Commonsense Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commonsense can be vital in some applications like Natural Language Understanding (NLU), where it is often required to resolve ambiguity arising from implicit knowledge and underspecification. In spite of the remarkable success of neural network approaches on a variety of Natural Language Processing tasks, many of them struggle to react effectively in cases that require commonsense knowledge. In the present research, we take advantage of the availability of the open multilingual knowledge graph ConceptNet, by using it as an additional external resource in Named Entity Recognition (NER). Our proposed architecture involves BiLSTM layers combined with a CRF layer that was augmented with some features such as pre-trained word embedding layers and dropout layers. Moreover, apart from using word representations, we used also character-based representation to capture the morphological and the orthographic information. Our experiments and evaluations showed an improvement in the overall performance with +2.86 in the F1-measure. Commonsense reasonnig has been employed in other studies and NLP tasks but to the best of our knowledge, there is no study relating the integration of a commonsense knowledge base in NER.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".