Skip to main content

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering ((BRIEFSSPEECHTECH))

  • 575 Accesses

Abstract

We have tried to show from our discussion in the previous chapters that while ensembles of classifiers based on supervised learning methods trained on multiple contextual features have proved to perform superiorly in current mainstream automatic word sense disambiguation, and their performance might have apparently reached a plateau, there are still considerable unknowns as far as the lexical sensitivity of the task is concerned. We have also suggested that these under-explored parts cannot be adequately addressed from the computational perspective alone, as they probably involve some intrinsic properties of words and senses, like concept concreteness, which may be cognitively based. In this final chapter, we put forth some preliminary evidence regarding the impact of concept concreteness on the information demand in disambiguation, and conclude with a research agenda which attempts to bring the two camps closer to advance the research on an area of their mutual concern.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The disambiguation was based on a narrow semantic relation measured from the taxonomic distance of two senses with respect to the WordNet hierarchy. Monosemous words were used to start a recursive filtering algorithm to gradually purge the irrelevant senses and leave only the relevant senses in a finite number of processing cycles.

  2. 2.

    The HECTOR sense inventory was used for SENSEVAL-1, and some had very different degrees of polysemy. For example, “knee” has as many as 22 senses. On the other hand, OntoNotes senses were used for sense distinction in SENSEVAL-4 (Task 17). WordNet 3.0 senses were used as a common reference for both sets of words.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oi Yee Kwong .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kwong, O.Y. (2013). Lexical Sensitivity of WSD: An Outlook. In: New Perspectives on Computational and Cognitive Strategies for Word Sense Disambiguation. SpringerBriefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering(). Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1320-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1320-2_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-1319-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-1320-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics