BUAP: Evaluating Features for Multilingual and Cross-Level Semantic Textual Similarity

22872

Authors

nan

Abstract

In this paper we present the evaluation of different features for multiligual and cross- level semantic textual similarity. Three dif- ferent types of features were used: lexical, knowledge-based and corpus-based. The re- sults obtained at the Semeval competition rank our approaches above the average of the rest of the teams highlighting the usefulness of the features presented in this paper. 1

Keywords

nan

Full Content

Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2014), pages 149–153, Dublin, Ireland, August 23-24, 2014. BUAP: Evaluating Features for Multilingual and Cross-Level Semantic Textual Similarity Darnes Vilari˜no, David Pinto, Sa´ul Le´on, Mireya Tovar,Beatriz Beltr´an Benem´erita Universidad Aut´onoma de Puebla Faculty of Computer Science 14 Sur y Av. San Claudio, CU Puebla, Puebla, M´exico {darnes,dpinto,saul.leon,mtovar,bbeltran}@cs.buap.mx Abstract In this paper we present the evaluation of different features for multiligual and cross- level semantic textual similarity. Three dif- ferent types of features were used: lexical, knowledge-based and corpus-based. The re- sults obtained at the Semeval competition rank our approaches above the average of the rest of the teams highlighting the usefulness of the features presented in this paper. 1 Introduction Semantic textual similarity aims to capture whether the meaning of two texts are similar. This concept is somehow different from the textual similarity def- inition itself, because in the latter we are only in- terested in measuring the number of lexical com- ponents that the two texts share. Therefore, tex- tual similarity can range from exact semantic equiv- alence to a complete unrelatedness pair of texts. Finding the semantic similarity between a pair of texts has become a big challenge for specialists in Natural Language Processing (NLP), because it has applications in some NLP task such as machine translation, automatic construction of summaries, authorship attribution, machine reading comprehen- sion, information retrieval, among others, which usually need a manner to calculate degrees of simi- larity between two given texts. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons At- tribution 4.0 International Licence. Page numbers and pro- ceedings footer are added by the organisers. Licence details: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Semantic textual similarity can be calculated us- ing texts of different sizes, for example between, a paragraph and a sentence, or a sentence and a phrase, or a phrase and a word, or even a word and a sense. When we consider this difference, we say the task is called “Cross-Level Semantic Similarity”, but when this distinction is not considered, then we call the task just as “Semantic Textual Similarity”. In this paper, we evaluate different features for de- termining those that obtain the best performances for calculating both, cross-level semantic similarity and multilingual semantic textual similarity. The remaining of this paper is structured as fol- lows. Section 2 presents the features used in both experiments. Section 3 shows the manner we used the features for determining the degree of seman- tic textual similarity. Section 4, on the other hand, shows the experiments we have carried out for de- termining cross-level semantic similarity. Finally, in Section 5 the conclusions and findings are given. 2 Description of Features In this section we describe the different features used for evaluation semantic textual similarity. Basically, we have used three different types of features: lex- ical, knowledge-based and corpus-based. The first one, counts the frequency of ocurrence of lexical features which include n-grams of characters, skip- grams1, words and some lexical relationships such as synonymy or hypernymy. Additionally, we …

Content truncated to 500 words

Labeled Text

In this paper we present the evaluation of different features for multiligual and crosslevel semantic textual similarity. Three different types of features were used: lexical, knowledge-based and corpus-based. The results obtained at the Semeval competition rank our approaches above the average of the rest of the teams highlighting the usefulness of the features presented in this paper. 1

Publication Details

Paper ID:
22872
Year:
2014
Publication:
TIPSTER
Publication Type:
conf
DOI:
nan