Static and dynamic vector semantics for lambda calculus models of natural language

• Autorzy: Sadrzadeh M. , Muskens R.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v6i2.228

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Vector models of language are based on contextual aspects of language – distributions of words and how they co-occur in text. Truth conditional models focus on logical aspects of language and on how words combine to contribute to these aspects. In the truth conditional approach, there is a focus on the denotations of phrases. In vector models, the degree of co-occurrence of words in context determines how similar their meanings are. The two approaches have complementary virtues. In this paper we combine them and develop a vector semantics for language, based on the typed lambda calculus. We provide two types of vector semantics: a static one using techniques from the truth conditional tradition, and a dynamic one with a form of interpretation inspired by Heim’s context change potentials. We show, with examples, how the dynamic model can be applied to entailment between a corpus and a sentence.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

simple typed lambda calculus; vector semantic; composition; context update potential; dynamic logic

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN
• Czasopismo: Journal of Language Modelling
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 6, No. 2
• Strony: 319--351
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 39 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Sadrzadeh M.

• School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London

autor

Muskens R.

• Department of Philosophy, Tilburg University

Bibliografia

• [1] Marco Baroni, Raffaella Bernardi, and Roberto Zamparelli (2014), Frege in space: A program for compositional distributional semantics, Linguistic Issues in Language Technology, 9:241-346.
• [2] Marco Baroni and Roberto Zamparelli (2010), Nouns are vectors, adjectives are matrices: representing adjective-noun constructions in semantic space, in Hang Li and Lluìs Màrquez, editors, Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP ’10, pp. 1183-1193, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/D10-1115.
• [3] Johan van Benthem (1986), Essays in Logical Semantics, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 29, Reidel, Dordrecht.
• [4] Samuel Bowman, Gabor Angeli, Christopher Potts, and Christopher Manning (2015), A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference, in Lluìs Màrquez, Chris Callison-Burch, and Jian Su, editors, Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP ’15, pp. 632-642, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/D15-1075.
• [5] Bob Coecke, Edward Grefenstette, and Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (2013), Lambek vs. Lambek: Functorial vector space semantics and string diagrams for Lambek calculus, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 164 (11):1079-1100.
• [6] Bob Coecke, Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh, and Stephen Clark (2010), Mathematical foundations for distributed compositional model of meaning, Linguistic Analysis, 36:345-384.
• [7] Robin Cooper, Dick Crouch, Jan Van Eijck, Chris Fox, Johan Van Genabith, Jan Jaspars, Hans Kamp, David Milward, Manfred Pinkal, and Massimo Poesio (1996), Using the framework, Technical Report LRE 62-051 D-16, The FraCaS Consortium.
• [8] Mary Dalrymple, John Lamping, and Vijay Saraswat (1993), LFG semantics via constraints, in Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, EACL ’93, pp. 97-105, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/E93-1013.
• [9] John Rupert Firth (1957), A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930-1955, in Studies in Linguistic Analysis, pp. 1-32, Blackwell, Oxford.
• [10] Edward Grefenstette and Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (2015), Concrete models and empirical evaluations for the categorical compositional distributional model of meaning, Computational Linguistics, 41:71-118.
• [11] Philippe de Groote (2001), Towards abstract categorial grammars, in Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 10th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL ’01, pp. 252-259, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/P01-1033.
• [12] Philippe de Groote (2006), Towards a Montagovian account of dynamics, Semantics and Linguistic Theory, 16:1-16.
• [13] Irene Heim (1983), On the projection problem for presuppositions, in Proceedings of the Second Annual West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, pp. 114-125, reprinted in Portner and Partee (2002).
• [14] Irene Heim and Angelika Kratzer (1998), Semantics in Generative Grammar, Blackwell textbooks in linguistics, Blackwell, Oxford, ISBN 0-631-19712-5.
• [15] Leon Henkin (1950), Completeness in the theory of types, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 15:81-91.
• [16] Nanda Kambhatla (2004), Combining lexical, syntactic, and semantic features with maximum entropy models for extracting relations, in Proceedings of the ACL 2004 on Interactive Poster and Demonstration Sessions, ACLdemo ’04, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/P04-3022.
• [17] Lauri Karttunen (1974), Presupposition and linguistic context, Theoretical Linguistics, 1 (1-3):182-194.
• [18] Ewan Klein and Ivan Sag (1985), Type-driven translation, Linguistics and Philosophy, 8 (2):163-201.
• [19] Jayant Krishnamurthy and Tom Mitchell (2013), Vector space semantic parsing: A framework for compositional vector space models, in Proceedings of the 2013 ACL Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality, pp. 1-10, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/W13-3201.
• [20] Mike Lewis and Mark Steedman (2013), Combined distributional and logical semantics, Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 1:179-192, http://aclweb.org/anthology/Q13-1015.
• [21] Jean Maillard, Stephen Clark, and Edward Grefenstette (2014), A type-driven tensor-based semantics for CCG, in Robin Cooper, Simon Dobnik, Shalom Lappin, and Staffan Larsson, editors, Proceedings of the EACL 2014 on Type Theory and Natural Language Semantics (TTNLS), pp. 46-54, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/W14-1406.
• [22] Jeff Mitchell and Mirella Lapata (2010), Composition in distributional models of semantics, Cognitive Science, 34 (8):1388-1439.
• [23] Richard Montague (1974), The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English, in Richmond Thomason, editor, Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague, pp. 247-270, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
• [24] Reinhard Muskens (2001), Categorial grammar and lexical-functional grammar, in Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King, editors, Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, University of Hong Kong, pp. 259-279, CSLI, Stanford, CA, http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/LFG/6/lfg01.html.
• [25] Reinhard Muskens (2003), Language, lambdas, and logic, in Geert-Jan Kruijff and Richard Oehrle, editors, Resource-Sensitivity, Binding and Anaphora, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, pp. 23-54, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
• [26] Reinhard Muskens (2010), New directions in type-theoretic grammars, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 19 (2):129-136.
• [27] Reinhard Muskens and Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (2016a), Context update for lambdas and vectors, in Maxime Amblard, Philippe De Groote, Sylvain Pogodalla, and Christian Retoré, editors, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics (LACL 2016), volume 10054 of LNCS, pp. 247-254, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• [28] Reinhard Muskens and Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (2016b), Lambdas and vectors, in Workshop on Distributional Semantics and Linguistic Theory (DSALT), 28th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information (ESSLLI), Free University of Bozen-Bolzano.
• [29] Reinhard Muskens, Johan van Benthem, and Albert Visser (1997), Dynamics, in Johan van Benthem and Alice ter Meulen, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 587-648, Elsevier.
• [30] Barbara Partee (1986), Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles, in Jeroen Groenendijk, Dick de Jongh, and Martin Stokhof, editors, Studies in Discourse Representation and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, pp. 115-143, Foris, Dordrecht.
• [31] Hoifung Poon and Pedro Domingos (2009), Unsupervised semantic parsing, in Philipp Koehn and Rada Mihalcea, editors, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-9): Volume 1, pp. 1-10, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, ISBN 978-1-932432-59-6, http://aclweb.org/anthology/D09-1001.
• [32] Paul Portner and Barbara Partee (2002), Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings, Blackwell, Oxford.
• [33] Sebastian Riedel, Limin Yao, and Andrew McCallum (2010), Modeling relations and their mentions without labeled text, in José Luis Balcázar, Francesco Bonchi, Aristides Gionis, and Michèle Sebag, editors, Proceedings of the 2010 European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases (ECML PKDD’10): Part III, volume 6323 of LNAI, pp. 148-163, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, ISBN 3-642-15938-9, 978-3-642-15938-1, http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1889788.1889799.
• [34] Herbert Rubenstein and John Goodenough (1965), Contextual correlates of synonymy, Communications of the ACM, 8 (10):627-633.
• [35] Mark Steedman (2000), The Syntactic Process, MIT Press.
• [36] Alfred Tarski (1965), Introduction to Logic and to the Methodology of Deductive Sciences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 3rd edition.
• [37] Frank Veltman (1996), Defaults in update semantics, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 25 (3):221-261.
• [38] Limin Yao, Sebastian Riedel, and Andrew McCallum (2012), Unsupervised relation discovery with sense disambiguation, in Haizhou Li, Chin-Yew Lin, Miles Osborne, Gary Geunbae Lee, and Jong C. Park, editors, Proceedings of the 50th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: long papers – Volume 1, ACL ’12, pp. 712-720, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/P12-1075.
• [39] Naomi Zeichner, Jonathan Berant, and Ido Dagan (2012), Crowdsourcing inference-rule evaluation, in Haizhou Li, Chin-Yew Lin, Miles Osborne, Gary Geunbae Lee, and Jong C. Park, editors, Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Short Papers – Volume 2, ACL ’12, pp. 156-160, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, http://aclweb.org/anthology/P12-2031.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2019).