运用基础词表征研究词汇概念理论

Dylan Ebert, Ellie Pavlick
{"title":"运用基础词表征研究词汇概念理论","authors":"Dylan Ebert, Ellie Pavlick","doi":"10.18653/v1/W19-2918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The fields of cognitive science and philosophy have proposed many different theories for how humans represent “concepts”. Multiple such theories are compatible with state-of-the-art NLP methods, and could in principle be operationalized using neural networks. We focus on two particularly prominent theories–Classical Theory and Prototype Theory–in the context of visually-grounded lexical representations. We compare when and how the behavior of models based on these theories differs in terms of categorization and entailment tasks. Our preliminary results suggest that Classical-based representations perform better for entailment and Prototype-based representations perform better for categorization. We discuss plans for additional experiments needed to confirm these initial observations.","PeriodicalId":428409,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Grounded Word Representations to Study Theories of Lexical Concepts\",\"authors\":\"Dylan Ebert, Ellie Pavlick\",\"doi\":\"10.18653/v1/W19-2918\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The fields of cognitive science and philosophy have proposed many different theories for how humans represent “concepts”. Multiple such theories are compatible with state-of-the-art NLP methods, and could in principle be operationalized using neural networks. We focus on two particularly prominent theories–Classical Theory and Prototype Theory–in the context of visually-grounded lexical representations. We compare when and how the behavior of models based on these theories differs in terms of categorization and entailment tasks. Our preliminary results suggest that Classical-based representations perform better for entailment and Prototype-based representations perform better for categorization. We discuss plans for additional experiments needed to confirm these initial observations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":428409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-2918\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-2918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

认知科学和哲学领域已经提出了许多关于人类如何表示“概念”的不同理论。多个这样的理论与最先进的NLP方法兼容,原则上可以使用神经网络进行操作。在视觉基础词汇表征的背景下,我们关注两个特别突出的理论——经典理论和原型理论。我们比较了基于这些理论的模型的行为何时以及如何在分类和蕴涵任务方面有所不同。我们的初步结果表明,基于经典的表征在蕴涵方面表现更好,而基于原型的表征在分类方面表现更好。我们讨论了确认这些初步观察结果所需的其他实验计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Grounded Word Representations to Study Theories of Lexical Concepts
The fields of cognitive science and philosophy have proposed many different theories for how humans represent “concepts”. Multiple such theories are compatible with state-of-the-art NLP methods, and could in principle be operationalized using neural networks. We focus on two particularly prominent theories–Classical Theory and Prototype Theory–in the context of visually-grounded lexical representations. We compare when and how the behavior of models based on these theories differs in terms of categorization and entailment tasks. Our preliminary results suggest that Classical-based representations perform better for entailment and Prototype-based representations perform better for categorization. We discuss plans for additional experiments needed to confirm these initial observations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信