Korean named entity recognition based on language-specific features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we propose a novel way of improving named entity recognition (NER) in the Korean language using its language-specific features. While the field of NER has been studied extensively in recent years, the mechanism of efficiently recognizing named entities (NEs) in Korean has hardly been explored. This is because the Korean language has distinct linguistic properties that present challenges for modeling. Therefore, an annotation scheme for Korean corpora by adopting the CoNLL-U format, which decomposes Korean words into morphemes and reduces the ambiguity of NEs in the original segmentation that may contain functional morphemes such as postpositions and particles, is proposed herein. We investigate how the NE tags are best represented in this morpheme-based scheme and implement an algorithm to convert word-based and syllable-based Korean corpora with NEs into the proposed morpheme-based format. Analyses of the results of traditional and neural models reveal that the proposed morpheme-based format is feasible, and the varied performances of the models under the influence of various additional language-specific features are demonstrated. Extrinsic conditions were also considered to observe the variance of the performances of the proposed models, given different types of data, including the original segmentation and different types of tagging formats.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".