Re: Word sense disambiguation
t; > >> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Beylerian < > >> > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Cristian, > >> >> > >> >> Thank you for your interest. > >> >> > >> >> The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware > there > >> >> is no timeline for it. > >> >> > >> >> You can find the sandboxed version here: > >> >> https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd > >> >> > >> >> I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and > there > >> >> are still some details to work out. > >> >> But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and > >> >> contribute. > >> >> I will assist as much as possible. > >> >> > >> >> Best, > >> >> > >> >> Anthony > >> >> > >> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < > >> >> cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Hi, > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on > >> >>> Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any > >> but > >> >>> I > >> >>> remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on > >> >>> implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there > a > >> >>> timeline for adding it? > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks, > >> >>> Cristian > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> >
Re: Word sense disambiguation
Hello, Babelfy is not open source software. DBpedia Spotlight performs Named Entity Disambiguation (APL 2.0), UKB (GPL) does WSD and obtains very good results, and the IMS system is available for download. There will be others, I am sure, but just talking off the top of my head. HTH R On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Cristian Petroaca wrote: > I agree with you. WSD should be included in OpenNLP once it has a > reasonably good performance. > On the other hand, I have seen few libraries or APIs doing WSD and almost > none doing it right. That may be indicative of how hard the problem is. > > The only promising api I found is Babelfy : http://babelfy.org/about. It > uses a graph based model based on their BabelNet Knowledge base in order to > predict word senses. I think it's based on this paper: > http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/Q14-1019. Any thoughts on this? > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Anthony Beylerian < > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hey Cristian, >> >> We have tried different approaches such as: >> >> - Lesk (original) [1] >> - Most frequent sense from the data (MFS) >> - Extended Lesk (with different scoring functions) >> - It makes sense (IMS) [2] >> - A sense clustering approach (I don't immediately recall the reference) >> >> Lesk and MFS are meant to be used as baselines for evaluation purpose only. >> The extended version of Lesk is an effort to improve the original, through >> additional information from semantic relationships. >> Although it's not very accurate, it could be useful since it is an >> unsupervised method (no need for large training data). >> However, there were some caveats, as both approaches need to pre-load >> dictionaries as well as score a semantic graph from WordNet at runtime. >> >> IMS is a supervised method which we were hoping to mainly use, since it >> scored around 80% accuracy on SemEval, however that is only for the >> coarse-grained case. However, in reality words have various degrees of >> polysemy, and when tested in the fine-grained case the results were much >> lower. >> We have also experimented with a simple clustering approach but the >> improvements were not considerable as far as I remember. >> >> I just checked the latest results on Semeval2015 [3] and they look a bit >> improved on the fine-grained case ~65% F1. >> However, in some particular domains it looks like the accuracy increases, >> so it could depend on the use case. >> >> On the other hand, there could be some more recent studies that could yield >> better results, but that would need some more investigation. >> >> There are also some other issues such as lack of direct multi-lingual >> support from WordNet, missing sense definitions etc. >> We were also still looking for a better source of sense definitions back >> then. >> In any case, I believe it would be better to have higher performance before >> putting this in the official distribution, however that highly depends on >> the team. >> Otherwise, different parts of the code just need some simple refactoring as >> well. >> >> Best, >> >> Anthony >> >> [1] : M. Lesk, Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable >> dictionaries >> [2] : https://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~nght/pubs/ims.pdf >> [3] : http://alt.qcri.org/semeval2015/task13/index.php?id=results >> >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Cristian Petroaca < >> cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi Anthony, >> > >> > I'd be interested to discuss this further. >> > What are the wsd methods used? Any links to papers? >> > How does the module perform when being evaluated against Senseval? >> > >> > How much work do you think it's necessary in order to have a functioning >> > WSD module in the context of OpenNLP? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Cristian >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Beylerian < >> > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Cristian, >> >> >> >> Thank you for your interest. >> >> >> >> The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware there >> >> is no timeline for it. >> >> >> >> You can find the sandboxed version here: >> >> https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd >> >> >> >> I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and there >> >> are still some details to work out. >> >> But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and >> >> contribute. >> >> I will assist as much as possible. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Anthony >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < >> >> cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on >> >>> Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any >> but >> >>> I >> >>> remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on >> >>> implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a >> >>> timeline for adding it? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> Cristian >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >>
Re: Word sense disambiguation
I agree with you. WSD should be included in OpenNLP once it has a reasonably good performance. On the other hand, I have seen few libraries or APIs doing WSD and almost none doing it right. That may be indicative of how hard the problem is. The only promising api I found is Babelfy : http://babelfy.org/about. It uses a graph based model based on their BabelNet Knowledge base in order to predict word senses. I think it's based on this paper: http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/Q14-1019. Any thoughts on this? On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Anthony Beylerian < anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Cristian, > > We have tried different approaches such as: > > - Lesk (original) [1] > - Most frequent sense from the data (MFS) > - Extended Lesk (with different scoring functions) > - It makes sense (IMS) [2] > - A sense clustering approach (I don't immediately recall the reference) > > Lesk and MFS are meant to be used as baselines for evaluation purpose only. > The extended version of Lesk is an effort to improve the original, through > additional information from semantic relationships. > Although it's not very accurate, it could be useful since it is an > unsupervised method (no need for large training data). > However, there were some caveats, as both approaches need to pre-load > dictionaries as well as score a semantic graph from WordNet at runtime. > > IMS is a supervised method which we were hoping to mainly use, since it > scored around 80% accuracy on SemEval, however that is only for the > coarse-grained case. However, in reality words have various degrees of > polysemy, and when tested in the fine-grained case the results were much > lower. > We have also experimented with a simple clustering approach but the > improvements were not considerable as far as I remember. > > I just checked the latest results on Semeval2015 [3] and they look a bit > improved on the fine-grained case ~65% F1. > However, in some particular domains it looks like the accuracy increases, > so it could depend on the use case. > > On the other hand, there could be some more recent studies that could yield > better results, but that would need some more investigation. > > There are also some other issues such as lack of direct multi-lingual > support from WordNet, missing sense definitions etc. > We were also still looking for a better source of sense definitions back > then. > In any case, I believe it would be better to have higher performance before > putting this in the official distribution, however that highly depends on > the team. > Otherwise, different parts of the code just need some simple refactoring as > well. > > Best, > > Anthony > > [1] : M. Lesk, Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable > dictionaries > [2] : https://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~nght/pubs/ims.pdf > [3] : http://alt.qcri.org/semeval2015/task13/index.php?id=results > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Cristian Petroaca < > cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Anthony, > > > > I'd be interested to discuss this further. > > What are the wsd methods used? Any links to papers? > > How does the module perform when being evaluated against Senseval? > > > > How much work do you think it's necessary in order to have a functioning > > WSD module in the context of OpenNLP? > > > > Thanks, > > Cristian > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Beylerian < > > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Cristian, > >> > >> Thank you for your interest. > >> > >> The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware there > >> is no timeline for it. > >> > >> You can find the sandboxed version here: > >> https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd > >> > >> I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and there > >> are still some details to work out. > >> But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and > >> contribute. > >> I will assist as much as possible. > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Anthony > >> > >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < > >> cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on > >>> Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any > but > >>> I > >>> remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on > >>> implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a > >>> timeline for adding it? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Cristian > >>> > >> > >> > > >
Fwd: Word sense disambiguation
Hey Cristian, We have tried different approaches such as: - Lesk (original) [1] - Most frequent sense from the data (MFS) - Extended Lesk (with different scoring functions) - It makes sense (IMS) [2] - A sense clustering approach (I don't immediately recall the reference) Lesk and MFS are meant to be used as baselines for evaluation purpose only. The extended version of Lesk is an effort to improve the original, through additional information from semantic relationships. Although it's not very accurate, it could be useful since it is an unsupervised method (no need for large training data). However, there were some caveats, as both approaches need to pre-load dictionaries as well as score a semantic graph from WordNet at runtime. IMS is a supervised method which we were hoping to mainly use, since it scored around 80% accuracy on SemEval, however that is only for the coarse-grained case. However, in reality words have various degrees of polysemy, and when tested in the fine-grained case the results were much lower. We have also experimented with a simple clustering approach but the improvements were not considerable as far as I remember. I just checked the latest results on Semeval2015 [3] and they look a bit improved on the fine-grained case ~65% F1. However, in some particular domains it looks like the accuracy increases, so it could depend on the use case. On the other hand, there could be some more recent studies that could yield better results, but that would need some more investigation. There are also some other issues such as lack of direct multi-lingual support from WordNet, missing sense definitions etc. We were also still looking for a better source of sense definitions back then. In any case, I believe it would be better to have higher performance before putting this in the official distribution, however that highly depends on the team. Otherwise, different parts of the code just need some simple refactoring as well. Best, Anthony [1] : M. Lesk, Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries [2] : https://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~nght/pubs/ims.pdf [3] : http://alt.qcri.org/semeval2015/task13/index.php?id=results On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Cristian Petroaca < cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Anthony, > > I'd be interested to discuss this further. > What are the wsd methods used? Any links to papers? > How does the module perform when being evaluated against Senseval? > > How much work do you think it's necessary in order to have a functioning > WSD module in the context of OpenNLP? > > Thanks, > Cristian > > > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Beylerian < > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Cristian, >> >> Thank you for your interest. >> >> The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware there >> is no timeline for it. >> >> You can find the sandboxed version here: >> https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd >> >> I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and there >> are still some details to work out. >> But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and >> contribute. >> I will assist as much as possible. >> >> Best, >> >> Anthony >> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < >> cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on >>> Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any but >>> I >>> remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on >>> implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a >>> timeline for adding it? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Cristian >>> >> >> >
Re: Word sense disambiguation
Hi Anthony, I'd be interested to discuss this further. What are the wsd methods used? Any links to papers? How does the module perform when being evaluated against Senseval? How much work do you think it's necessary in order to have a functioning WSD module in the context of OpenNLP? Thanks, Cristian On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Beylerian < anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Cristian, > > Thank you for your interest. > > The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware there > is no timeline for it. > > You can find the sandboxed version here: > https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd > > I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and there > are still some details to work out. > But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and > contribute. > I will assist as much as possible. > > Best, > > Anthony > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < > cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on >> Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any but I >> remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on >> implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a >> timeline for adding it? >> >> Thanks, >> Cristian >> > >
Re: Word sense disambiguation
Hi Cristian, Thank you for your interest. The WSD module is currently experimental, so as far as I am aware there is no timeline for it. You can find the sandboxed version here: https://github.com/apache/opennlp-sandbox/tree/master/opennlp-wsd I personally didn't have the time to revisit this for a while and there are still some details to work out. But if you are really interested, you are welcome to discuss and contribute. I will assist as much as possible. Best, Anthony On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Cristian Petroaca < cristian.petro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on > Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any but I > remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on > implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a > timeline for adding it? > > Thanks, > Cristian >
Word sense disambiguation
Hi, I'm interested in word sense disambiguation (particularly based on Wordnet). I noticed that the latest OpenNLP version doesn't have any but I remember that a couple of years ago there was somebody working on implementing it. Why isn't it in the official OpenNLP jar? Is there a timeline for adding it? Thanks, Cristian
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
One more observation. The interfaces might depend on whether the sense source includes proper nouns (entities) or not. For example, WordNet includes some small, but noticeable amount (~8000 if I'm not mistaken) of entities. It might be better to separate the two, it might be not - it depends. But the interfaces might depend on this assumption. And considering entities in WSD the situation becomes close (similar) to NER. It would be great if you take this into account and make assumptions explicit. It would be also great to discuss your findings in the state of the art of interfaces for WSD and sense (entity) sources. Aliaksandr On 18 February 2015 at 14:39, Anthony Beylerian < anthonybeyler...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thank you for the feedback, I believe that having separate interfaces as > mentioned for sense provision and disambiguation would be a good idea. > We will try to survey the techniques and study the library further to > propose a first structure when possible. > Best, > > Anthony > > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > > From: kottm...@gmail.com > > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:48:48 +0100 > > > > On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 16:29 +0100, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote: > > > Jörn, to avoid ambiguity in case you addressed me to propose a WSD > > > interface. I'd prefer Anthony to come up with a proposal, because he is > > > closer to the multiple WSD algorithms that would be nice to include in > the > > > analysis. > > > > Sorry, for being unclear, yes I addressed Anthony. But everybody who has > > an opinion is very welcome to join the discussion or propose something. > > > > Jörn > > > > >
RE: Word Sense Disambiguation
Thank you for the feedback, I believe that having separate interfaces as mentioned for sense provision and disambiguation would be a good idea. We will try to survey the techniques and study the library further to propose a first structure when possible. Best, Anthony > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > From: kottm...@gmail.com > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:48:48 +0100 > > On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 16:29 +0100, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote: > > Jörn, to avoid ambiguity in case you addressed me to propose a WSD > > interface. I'd prefer Anthony to come up with a proposal, because he is > > closer to the multiple WSD algorithms that would be nice to include in the > > analysis. > > Sorry, for being unclear, yes I addressed Anthony. But everybody who has > an opinion is very welcome to join the discussion or propose something. > > Jörn >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 16:29 +0100, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote: > Jörn, to avoid ambiguity in case you addressed me to propose a WSD > interface. I'd prefer Anthony to come up with a proposal, because he is > closer to the multiple WSD algorithms that would be nice to include in the > analysis. Sorry, for being unclear, yes I addressed Anthony. But everybody who has an opinion is very welcome to join the discussion or propose something. Jörn
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
Jörn, to avoid ambiguity in case you addressed me to propose a WSD interface. I'd prefer Anthony to come up with a proposal, because he is closer to the multiple WSD algorithms that would be nice to include in the analysis. Aliaksandr On 16 February 2015 at 15:19, Joern Kottmann wrote: > On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 11:09 +0100, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote: > > Since you're perhaps deeper in this that others you seem to be the > > best > > candidate to make a proposal, to check the state of the art algorithms > > and > > devise general enough interface for all or most of them. One way could > > be > > to see what the algorithms typically require, how diverse are sources > > of > > senses (WordNet alone has multiple different interfaces to access it), > > which options do the algorithms take and start somewhere there to see > > that > > the interface is flexible enough to accommodate that diversity, has > > ability > > to do some built-in checks (such as detecting the case of algorithm > > trained > > on one source of senses working with another, or perhaps algorithm > > relying > > on a relation which is missing in the sense source) and be similar to > > the > > rest of OpenNLP. We might even end up with two interfaces (e.g. for > > sense > > provider and for WSD itself). > > > > What do you think about this way? > > Please propose an interface. We will discuss it here on the list. > > Jörn > >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 11:09 +0100, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote: > Since you're perhaps deeper in this that others you seem to be the > best > candidate to make a proposal, to check the state of the art algorithms > and > devise general enough interface for all or most of them. One way could > be > to see what the algorithms typically require, how diverse are sources > of > senses (WordNet alone has multiple different interfaces to access it), > which options do the algorithms take and start somewhere there to see > that > the interface is flexible enough to accommodate that diversity, has > ability > to do some built-in checks (such as detecting the case of algorithm > trained > on one source of senses working with another, or perhaps algorithm > relying > on a relation which is missing in the sense source) and be similar to > the > rest of OpenNLP. We might even end up with two interfaces (e.g. for > sense > provider and for WSD itself). > > What do you think about this way? Please propose an interface. We will discuss it here on the list. Jörn
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
Dear Anthony, > Thank you for your suggestions and please excuse the lack of clarity. > We're not sure about the process used by the team since we just joined. Me neither :) Just a suggestion, since it seems to me that ad-hoc evaluation in the UI might be subjective. It's nice to play with it, though, to get a feeling. And it would be perfect for demoing the algorithms! > So we thought the web-app would be convenient to test and visualize the > performances of what is in the pipeline before any code reviews. > Convenient to test - yes. Visualize - yes. Demoing - perfect. Playground - yes. Evaluate performance - only in a subjective way. Unless I miss or misunderstand something. Currently, we used a sample from the SemEval-2 dataset which seemed popular > just for testing, but as you mentioned we will perform the tests on public > corpora and update the Test Results section with the results and references. > That would be great! SemEval is popular, so as long as it is easily downloadable (many research datasets require registration, emailing, faxing forms). > However to move further, we were wondering about the interface to make > with OpenNLP as previously mentioned. > Since you're perhaps deeper in this that others you seem to be the best candidate to make a proposal, to check the state of the art algorithms and devise general enough interface for all or most of them. One way could be to see what the algorithms typically require, how diverse are sources of senses (WordNet alone has multiple different interfaces to access it), which options do the algorithms take and start somewhere there to see that the interface is flexible enough to accommodate that diversity, has ability to do some built-in checks (such as detecting the case of algorithm trained on one source of senses working with another, or perhaps algorithm relying on a relation which is missing in the sense source) and be similar to the rest of OpenNLP. We might even end up with two interfaces (e.g. for sense provider and for WSD itself). What do you think about this way? best regards, Aliaksandr
RE: Word Sense Disambiguation
Dear Aliaksadr, Thank you for your suggestions and please excuse the lack of clarity. We're not sure about the process used by the team since we just joined. So we thought the web-app would be convenient to test and visualize the performances of what is in the pipeline before any code reviews. Currently, we used a sample from the SemEval-2 dataset which seemed popular just for testing, but as you mentioned we will perform the tests on public corpora and update the Test Results section with the results and references. However to move further, we were wondering about the interface to make with OpenNLP as previously mentioned. Best, Anthony > Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:54:16 +0100 > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > From: aliaksa...@autayeu.com > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > > Anthony, the app looks really nice and neat! But I wonder what is the > intended benefit of us "trying" the algorithms? To have a subjective > impression? Let me know, maybe I missed something. > > Maybe it is better to link to papers with evaluation of the algorithms you > implement? Maybe even better to test your implementations on a public > sense-tagged corpus and post the evaluation results here? And maybe compare > these evaluations with peer-reviewed ones in the literature, thus making > sure your implementation is in line? What do you think? Do you think it is > feasible you do that? Any volunteers to do that? > > Aliaksandr > > On 13 February 2015 at 10:12, Anthony Beylerian < > anthonybeyler...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear devs, > > > > Please try some of the few (simpler) algorithms we implemented to warm up > > to the library : > > http://131.113.41.202:8080/opennlp-wsd-demo/nlp-wsd-fe/app/#/home > > (will make the source available after cleanup/housekeeping) > > > > We need to define the structure and method signatures, since we will later > > increment with more techniques. > > > > Any suggestions/references for the structure and signatures are welcome. > > Best, > > > > Anthony > > > > > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > > > From: kottm...@gmail.com > > > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > > > Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:10:19 +0100 > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One > > > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want > > > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. > > > > > > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking > > > different approaches. > > > > > > Jörn > > > > > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and > > myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were > > thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they > > do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, > > would like your opinion. > > > > > > > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES ( > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very > > exploratory stages here) and YTEX ( > > https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > > supports a general domain WSD" > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
Anthony, the app looks really nice and neat! But I wonder what is the intended benefit of us "trying" the algorithms? To have a subjective impression? Let me know, maybe I missed something. Maybe it is better to link to papers with evaluation of the algorithms you implement? Maybe even better to test your implementations on a public sense-tagged corpus and post the evaluation results here? And maybe compare these evaluations with peer-reviewed ones in the literature, thus making sure your implementation is in line? What do you think? Do you think it is feasible you do that? Any volunteers to do that? Aliaksandr On 13 February 2015 at 10:12, Anthony Beylerian < anthonybeyler...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear devs, > > Please try some of the few (simpler) algorithms we implemented to warm up > to the library : > http://131.113.41.202:8080/opennlp-wsd-demo/nlp-wsd-fe/app/#/home > (will make the source available after cleanup/housekeeping) > > We need to define the structure and method signatures, since we will later > increment with more techniques. > > Any suggestions/references for the structure and signatures are welcome. > Best, > > Anthony > > > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > > From: kottm...@gmail.com > > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > > Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:10:19 +0100 > > > > Hello, > > > > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One > > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want > > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. > > > > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking > > different approaches. > > > > Jörn > > > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and > myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were > thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they > do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, > would like your opinion. > > > > > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES ( > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very > exploratory stages here) and YTEX ( > https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > supports a general domain WSD" > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > >
RE: Word Sense Disambiguation
Dear devs, Please try some of the few (simpler) algorithms we implemented to warm up to the library : http://131.113.41.202:8080/opennlp-wsd-demo/nlp-wsd-fe/app/#/home (will make the source available after cleanup/housekeeping) We need to define the structure and method signatures, since we will later increment with more techniques. Any suggestions/references for the structure and signatures are welcome. Best, Anthony > Subject: Re: Word Sense Disambiguation > From: kottm...@gmail.com > To: dev@opennlp.apache.org > Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:10:19 +0100 > > Hello, > > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. > > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking > different approaches. > > Jörn > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and myself > > being interested in helping to implement this component, we were thinking > > of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they do not > > yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, would > > like your opinion. > > > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES > > (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very > > exploratory stages here) and YTEX > > (https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > > supports a general domain WSD" > > > > Best, > > > > Anthony > > > >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
+1 On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Mark G wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Tommaso Teofili > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Tommaso >> >> 2015-01-19 19:10 GMT+01:00 Joern Kottmann : >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One >> > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want >> > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. >> > >> > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking >> > different approaches. >> > >> > Jörn >> > >> > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: >> > > Hello, >> > > >> > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and >> > myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were >> > thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although >> they >> > do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively >> simple, >> > would like your opinion. >> > > >> > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES ( >> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently >> very >> > exploratory stages here) and YTEX ( >> > https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also >> > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently >> > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP >> > supports a general domain WSD" >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > >> > > Anthony >> > > >> > >> > >> > >>
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
+1 On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > +1 > > Tommaso > > 2015-01-19 19:10 GMT+01:00 Joern Kottmann : > > > Hello, > > > > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One > > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want > > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. > > > > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking > > different approaches. > > > > Jörn > > > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and > > myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were > > thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although > they > > do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively > simple, > > would like your opinion. > > > > > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES ( > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently > very > > exploratory stages here) and YTEX ( > > https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > > supports a general domain WSD" > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
+1 Tommaso 2015-01-19 19:10 GMT+01:00 Joern Kottmann : > Hello, > > +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One > goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want > to have in OpenNLP for WSD. > > We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking > different approaches. > > Jörn > > On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and > myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were > thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they > do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, > would like your opinion. > > > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES ( > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very > exploratory stages here) and YTEX ( > https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > supports a general domain WSD" > > > > Best, > > > > Anthony > > > > >
Re: Word Sense Disambiguation
Hello, +1 from me to just go ahead and implement the proposed approach. One goal of this implementation will be to figure out the interface we want to have in OpenNLP for WSD. We can later extend OpenNLP with more implementations which are taking different approaches. Jörn On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 16:50 +0900, Anthony Beylerian wrote: > Hello, > > I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and myself > being interested in helping to implement this component, we were thinking of > starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they do not yield > high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, would like > your opinion. > > Pei also mentioned "cTAKES > (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very > exploratory stages here) and YTEX > (https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also > just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently > knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP > supports a general domain WSD" > > Best, > > Anthony >
Word Sense Disambiguation
Hello, I'm new here, I previously mentioned to Jörn about my colleagues and myself being interested in helping to implement this component, we were thinking of starting with simple knowledge based approaches, although they do not yield high accuracy, but as a first step they are relatively simple, would like your opinion. Pei also mentioned "cTAKES (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ctakes/sandbox/ctakes-wsd/ currently very exploratory stages here) and YTEX (https://code.google.com/p/ytex/wiki/WordSenseDisambiguation_V08) is also just exploring WSD for the healthcare domain. It's also currently knowledge/ontology base for now... It would be great to see if OpenNLP supports a general domain WSD" Best, Anthony
