Research into representation learning models of lexical semantics usually utilizes some form of intrinsic evaluation to ensure that the learned representations reflect human semantic judgments. Lexical semantic similarity estimation is a widely used evaluation method, but efforts have typically focused on pairwise judgments of words in isolation, or are limited to specific contexts and lexical stimuli. There are limitations with these approaches that either do not provide any context for judgments, and thereby ignore ambiguity, or provide very specific sentential contexts that cannot then be used to generate a larger lexical resource. Furthermore, similarity between more than two items is not considered. We provide a full description and analysis of our recently proposed methodology for large-scale data set construction that produces a semantic classification of a large sample of verbs in the first phase, as well as multi-way similarity judgments made within the resultant semantic classes in the second phase. The methodology uses a spatial multi-arrangement approach proposed in the field of cognitive neuroscience for capturing multi-way similarity judgments of visual stimuli. We have adapted this method to handle polysemous linguistic stimuli and much larger samples than previous work. We specifically target verbs, but the method can equally be applied to other parts of speech. We perform cluster analysis on the data from the first phase and demonstrate how this might be useful in the construction of a comprehensive verb resource. We also analyze the semantic information captured by the second phase and discuss the potential of the spatially induced similarity judgments to better reflect human notions of word similarity. We demonstrate how the resultant data set can be used for fine-grained analyses and evaluation of representation learning models on the intrinsic tasks of semantic clustering and semantic similarity. In particular, we find that stronger static word embedding methods still outperform lexical representations emerging from more recent pre-training methods, both on word-level similarity and clustering. Moreover, thanks to the data set’s vast coverage, we are able to compare the benefits of specializing vector representations for a particular type of external knowledge by evaluating FrameNet- and VerbNet-retrofitted models on specific semantic domains such as “Heat” or “Motion.”

Word sense disambiguation and the related field of automated word sense induction traditionally assume that the occurrences of a lemma can be partitioned into senses. But this seems to be a much easier task for some lemmas than others. Our work builds on recent work that proposes describing word meaning in a graded fashion rather than through a strict partition into senses; in this article we argue that not all lemmas may need the more complex graded analysis, depending on their partitionability. Although there is plenty of evidence from previous studies and from the linguistics literature that there is a spectrum of partitionability of word meanings, this is the first attempt to measure the phenomenon and to couple the machine learning literature on clusterability with word usage data used in computational linguistics. We propose to operationalize partitionability as clusterability, a measure of how easy the occurrences of a lemma are to cluster. We test two ways of measuring clusterability: (1) existing measures from the machine learning literature that aim to measure the goodness of optimal k-means clusterings, and (2) the idea that if a lemma is more clusterable, two clusterings based on two different “views” of the same data points will be more congruent. The two views that we use are two different sets of manually constructed lexical substitutes for the target lemma, on the one hand monolingual paraphrases, and on the other hand translations. We apply automatic clustering to the manual annotations. We use manual annotations because we want the representations of the instances that we cluster to be as informative and “clean” as possible. We show that when we control for polysemy, our measures of clusterability tend to correlate with partitionability, in particular some of the type-(1) clusterability measures, and that these measures outperform a baseline that relies on the amount of overlap in a soft clustering.

Word sense disambiguation (WSD) is an old and important task in computational linguistics that still remains challenging, to machines as well as to human annotators. Recently there have been several proposals for representing word meaning in context that diverge from the traditional use of a single best sense for each occurrence. They represent word meaning in context through multiple paraphrases, as points in vector space, or as distributions over latent senses. New methods of evaluating and comparing these different representations are needed. In this paper we propose two novel annotation schemes that characterize word meaning in context in a graded fashion. In WS sim annotation, the applicability of each dictionary sense is rated on an ordinal scale. U sim annotation directly rates the similarity of pairs of usages of the same lemma, again on a scale. We find that the novel annotation schemes show good inter-annotator agreement, as well as a strong correlation with traditional single-sense annotation and with annotation of multiple lexical paraphrases. Annotators make use of the whole ordinal scale, and give very fine-grained judgments that “mix and match” senses for each individual usage. We also find that the U sim ratings obey the triangle inequality, justifying models that treat usage similarity as metric. There has recently been much work on grouping senses into coarse-grained groups. We demonstrate that graded WS sim and U sim ratings can be used to analyze existing coarse-grained sense groupings to identify sense groups that may not match intuitions of untrained native speakers. In the course of the comparison, we also show that the WS sim ratings are not subsumed by any static sense grouping.

There has been a great deal of recent research into word sense disambiguation, particularly since the inception of the Senseval evaluation exercises. Because a word often has more than one meaning, resolving word sense ambiguity could benefit applications that need some level of semantic interpretation of language input. A major problem is that the accuracy of word sense disambiguation systems is strongly dependent on the quantity of manually sense-tagged data available, and even the best systems, when tagging every word token in a document, perform little better than a simple heuristic that guesses the first, or predominant, sense of a word in all contexts. The success of this heuristic is due to the skewed nature of word sense distributions. Data for the heuristic can come from either dictionaries or a sample of sense-tagged data. However, there is a limited supply of the latter, and the sense distributions and predominant sense of a word can depend on the domain or source of a document. (The first sense of “star” for example would be different in the popular press and scientific journals). In this article, we expand on a previously proposed method for determining the predominant sense of a word automatically from raw text. We look at a number of different data sources and parameterizations of the method, using evaluation results and error analyses to identify where the method performs well and also where it does not. In particular, we find that the method does not work as well for verbs and adverbs as nouns and adjectives, but produces more accurate predominant sense information than the widely used SemCor corpus for nouns with low coverage in that corpus. We further show that the method is able to adapt successfully to domains when using domain specific corpora as input and where the input can either be hand-labeled for domain or automatically classified.

Selectional preferences have been used by word sense disambiguation (WSD) systems as one source of disambiguating information. We evaluate WSD using selectional preferences acquired for English adjective—noun, subject, and direct object grammatical relationships with respect to a standard test corpus. The selectional preferences are specific to verb or adjective classes, rather than individual word forms, so they can be used to disambiguate the co-occurring adjectives and verbs, rather than just the nominal argument heads. We also investigate use of the one-senseper-discourse heuristic to propagate a sense tag for a word to other occurrences of the same word within the current document in order to increase coverage. Although the preferences perform well in comparison with other unsupervised WSD systems on the same corpus, the results show that for many applications, further knowledge sources would be required to achieve an adequate level of accuracy and coverage. In addition to quantifying performance, we analyze the results to investigate the situations in which the selectional preferences achieve the best precision and in which the one-sense-per-discourse heuristic increases performance.