A Feature Extraction and Expansion-Based Approach for Question Target Identification and Classification

  • Wenxiu Xie
  • Dongfa GaoEmail author
  • Tianyong HaoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10390)


Detecting question target words from user questions is a crucial step in question target classification as it can precisely reflect the users’ potential need. In this paper we propose a concise approach named as QTF_EE to identify question target words, extract question target features and expand the features for question target classification. Based on two publicly available datasets that are labeled with 50 answer types, we compare the QTF_EE approach with 12 conventional classification methods such as bag-of-words and Random Forest as baseline methods. The results show that the QTF_EE approach outperforms the baselines and is able to improve the question target classification performance to an accuracy of 87.4%, demonstrating its effectiveness in question target identification.


Answer type classification Question target word Question target feature 



This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61403088), the programs of Personalized Health Service Public Platform based on Open and Big Data (No. 2014B010118005), Ancient Literature Knowledge base Platform for the Inheritance and Development of Traditional Chinese Medicine (No. 2014A020221039) and Innovative School Project in Higher Education of Guangdong (No. YQ2015062).


  1. 1.
    Suzuki, J., Taira, H., Sasaki, Y., Maeda, E.: Question classification using HDAG kernel. In: Proceedings of the ACL 2003 Workshop on Multilingual Summarization and Question Answering, vol. 12, pp. 61–68 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hovy, E., Gerber, L., Hermjakob, U., Lin, C.Y., Ravichandran, D.: Toward semantics-based answer pinpointing. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Human Language Technology Research, pp. 1–7 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moldovan, D., Paşca, M., Harabagiu, S., Surdeanu, M.: Performance issues and error analysis in an open-domain question answering system. ACM Trans. Inform. Syst. (TOIS) 21(2), 133–154 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li, X., Roth, D.: Learning question classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 1–7. Association for Computational Linguistics (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li, X., Roth, D.: Learning question classifiers: the role of semantic information. Natural Lang. Eng. 12(3), 229–249 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Srihari, R., Niu, C., Li, W.: A hybrid approach for named entity and sub-type tagging. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, pp. 247–254 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loni, B.: A survey of state-of-the-art methods on question classification. Literature Survey, p. 54. Published on TU Delft Repository (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hao, T., Xie, W., Xu, F.: A WordNet expansion-based approach for question targets identification and classification. In: Sun, M., Liu, Z., Zhang, M., Liu, Y. (eds.) CCL 2015. LNCS, vol. 9427, pp. 333–344. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-25816-4_27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hardy, H., Cheah, Y.N.: Question classification using extreme learning machine on semantic features. J. ICT Res. Appl. 7(1), 36–58 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Le-Hong, P., Phan, X.-H., Nguyen, T.-D.: Using dependency analysis to improve question classification. In: Nguyen, V.-H., Le, A.-C., Huynh, V.-N. (eds.) Knowledge and Systems Engineering. AISC, vol. 326, pp. 653–665. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11680-8_52 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, D., Lee, W.S.: Question classification using support vector machines. In: Proceedings of International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 26–32. ACM (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hacioglu, K., Ward, W.: Question classification with support vector machines and error correcting codes. In: Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003, vol. 2, pp. 28–30 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krishnan, V., Das, S., Chakrabarti, S.: Enhanced answer type inference from questions using sequential models. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 315–322 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Le Nguyen, M., Tri, N.T., Shimazu, A.: Subtree mining for question classification problem. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp. 1695–1700 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yen, S.J., Wu, Y.C., Yang, J.C., Lee, Y.S., Lee, C.J., Liu, J.J.: A support vector machine-based context-ranking model for question answering. Inf. Sci. 224, 77–87 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang, P., Bu, J., Chen, C., Qiu, G.: An effective feature-weighting model for question classification. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security, pp. 32–36 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blunsom, P., Kocik, K., Curran, J. R. Question classification with log-linear models. In: Proceedings of International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 615–616. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moldovan, D., Badulescu, A., Tatu, M., Antohe, D., Girju, R.: Models for the semantic classification of noun phrases. In: Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL Workshop on Computational Lexical Semantics, pp. 60–67 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hao, T., Agichtein, E.: Finding similar questions in collaborative question answering archives: toward bootstrapping-based equivalent pattern learning. Inf. Retrieval 15(3–4), 332–353 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, H., Chow, T., Wu, J.: Organizing books and authors using multi-layer SOM. IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst. 27(12), 2537–2550 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mrabet, Y., Kilicoglu, H., Roberts, K., Demner-Fushman, D.: Combining open-domain and biomedical knowledge for topic recognition in consumer health questions. In: Proceedings of AMIA Annual Symposium, p. 914 (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hao, T., Xie, W., Chen, C., Shen, Y.: Systematic comparison of question target classification taxonomies towards question answering. Commun. Comput. Inform. Sci. 568, 131–143 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jeong, Y., Myaeng, S.-H.: Using WordNet hypernyms and dependency features for phrasal-level event recognition and type classification. In: Serdyukov, P., Braslavski, P., Kuznetsov, S.O., Kamps, J., Rüger, S., Agichtein, E., Segalovich, I., Yilmaz, E. (eds.) ECIR 2013. LNCS, vol. 7814, pp. 267–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36973-5_23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G.S., Dean, J.: Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 3111–3119 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information Science and TechnologyGuangdong University of Foreign StudiesGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Collaborative Innovation Center for 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road StudiesGuangdong University of Foreign StudiesGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations