Pat, (01)
There are many useful methods that should be considered, and age
is not necessary an indication of quality. Some of the oldest
methods, when suitably refurbished, can be surprisingly good. (02)
PC> I said I would like to 'revisit' WEP with an ontology as
> a component I did not expect people to think of this as being
> close in method to the original. (03)
For example, the following article from IJCAI 2007 uses the
method of spreading activation that Quillian implemented for
his PhD dissertation 41 years earlier (1966): (04)
http://dli.iiit.ac.in/ijcai/IJCAI-2007/PDF/IJCAI07-279.pdf
Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) with Spreading Activation
Networks Generated from Thesauri (05)
Quillian applied spreading activations to WSD by tracing paths
through a network of definitions in the Merriam-Webster 7th
Collegiate dictionary. The IJCAI 2007 authors applied a
variation of that method to WordNet. In the paper, they say (06)
We show experimentally that our method achieves the best
reported accuracy taking into account all parts of speech
on a standard benchmark WSD data set, Senseval 2. (07)
At VivoMind, we're using conceptual graphs as our basic
knowledge representation. Although our methods are not the
same as the above, they are closer in spirit to Quillian's
than to Word Expert Parsing. And the amount of human effort
to implement them is a tiny fraction of anything that would
be required for WEP. There is absolutely no reason to ask
human volunteers to encode word experts. (08)
John (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
|