Measuring Semantic Similarity Between Words Using Lexical Knowledge and Neural Networks

  • Yuhua Li
  • Zuhair Bandar
  • David Mclean
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2412)


This paper investigates the determination of semantic similarity by the incorporation of structural semantic knowledge from a lexical database and the learning ability of neural networks. The lexical database is assumed to be organised in a hierarchical structure. The extracted lexical knowledge contains the relative location of the concerned words in the lexical hierarchy. The neural network then processes available lexical knowledge to provide semantic similarity for words. Experimental evaluation against a benchmark set of human similarity ratings demonstrates that the proposed method is effective in measuring semantic similarity between words.


Semantic Similarity Word Pair Short Path Length Human Rating Lexical Database 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Budanitsky, A., Hirst, G., Semantic Distance in WordNet: An Experimental, Application-Oriented Evaluation of Five Measures. Workshop WordNet and other Lexical Resources, North American Chapter of the Assoc. for Computational Linguistics. Pittsburgh, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Green, S.J., Building Hypertext Links by Computing Semantic Similarity. IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering 11 pp. 713–730, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haykin, S.S., Neural networks: a Comprehensive Foundation. 2nd edn. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, London, 1999.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jiang, J.J., Conrath, D.W., Semantic Similarity Based on Corpus Statistics and Lexical Taxonomy. Proc. ROCLING X. Taiwan, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin, D., An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity. Proc. Int’l Conf. Machine Learning. Madison, Wisconsin, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McHale, M., A Comparison of WordNet and Roget’s Taxonomy for Measuring Semantic Similarity. Proc. COLING/ACL Workshop, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller G.A., Charles, W.G., Contextual Correlates of Semantic Similarity. Language and Cognitive Processes 6 pp. 1–28, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Miller, G.A., WordNet: A Lexical Database for English. Comm. ACM 38 pp. 39–41, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rada, R., Mili, H., Bichnell, E., Blettner M., Development and Application of a Metric on Semantic Nets. IEEE Trans. System, Man, and Cybernetics 9, pp. 17–30, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Resnik, P., Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy: An Information-Based Measure and its Application to Problems of Ambiguity in Natural Language. J. AI Research 11, pp. 95–130, 1999.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Richardson, R., Smeaton, A.F., Murphy, J., Using WordNet as a Knowledge Base for Measuring Semantic Similarity. Working Paper CA-1294, Dublin City Univ., 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rubenstein, H., Goodenough, J.B., Contextual Correlates of Synonymy. Communications of the ACM 8, pp. 627–633, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Srihari, R.K., Zhang, Z.F., Rao, A.B., Intelligent Indexing and Semantic Retrieval of Multimodal Documents. Information Retrieval 2, pp. 245–275, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuhua Li
    • 1
  • Zuhair Bandar
    • 1
  • David Mclean
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligent System Group, Department of Computing and MathematicsManchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterEngland

Personalised recommendations