Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userCompositionality, Synonymy, and the Systematic Representation of Meaning
52
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Wlodek W. Zadrozny
Publication date
2000
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Authors
Shalom Lappin
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In a recent issue of Linguistics and Philosophy Kasmi and Pelletier (1998) (K&P), and Westerstahl (1998) criticize Zadroznys (1994) argument that any semantics can be represented compositionally. The argument is based upon Zadroznys theorem that every meaning function m can be encoded by a function mu such that (i) for any expression E of a specified language L, m(E) can be recovered from mu(E), and (ii) mu is a homomorphism from the syntactic structures of L to interpretations of L. In both cases, the primary motivation for the objections brought against Zadroznys argument is the view that his encoding of the original meaning function does not properly reflect the synonymy relations posited for the language. In this paper, we argue that these technical criticisms do not go through. In particular, we prove that mu properly encodes synonymy relations, i.e. if two expressions are synonymous, then their compositional meanings are identical. This corrects some misconceptions about the function mu, e.g. Janssen (1997). We suggest that the reason that semanticists have been anxious to preserve compositionality as a significant constraint on semantic theory is that it has been mistakenly regarded as a condition that must be satisfied by any theory that sustains a systematic connection between the meaning of an expression and the meanings of its parts. Recent developments in formal and computational semantics show that systematic theories of meanings need not be compositional.
rate research
Read More
We exhibit that the implicit UCCA parser does not address numeric fused-heads (NFHs) consistently, which could result either from inconsistent annotation, insufficient training data or a modelling limitation. and show which factors are involved. We consider this phenomenon important, as it is pervasive in text and critical for correct inference. Careful design and fine-grained annotation of NFHs in meaning representation frameworks would benefit downstream tasks such as machine translation, natural language inference and question answering, particularly when they require numeric reasoning, as recovering and categorizing them. We are investigating the treatment of this phenomenon by other meaning representations, such as AMR. We encourage researchers in meaning representations, and computational linguistics in general, to address this phenomenon in future research.
Synonymy and translational equivalence are the relations of sameness of meaning within and across languages. As the principal relations in wordnets and multi-wordnets, they are vital to computational lexical semantics, yet the field suffers from the absence of a common formal framework to define their properties and relationship. This paper proposes a unifying treatment of these two relations, which is validated by experiments on existing resources. In our view, synonymy and translational equivalence are simply different types of semantic identity. The theory establishes a solid foundation for critically re-evaluating prior work in cross-lingual semantics, and facilitating the creation, verification, and amelioration of lexical resources.
Knowledge base question answering (KBQA)is an important task in Natural Language Processing. Existing approaches face significant challenges including complex question understanding, necessity for reasoning, and lack of large end-to-end training datasets. In this work, we propose Neuro-Symbolic Question Answering (NSQA), a modular KBQA system, that leverages (1) Abstract Meaning Representation (AMR) parses for task-independent question understanding; (2) a simple yet effective graph transformation approach to convert AMR parses into candidate logical queries that are aligned to the KB; (3) a pipeline-based approach which integrates multiple, reusable modules that are trained specifically for their individual tasks (semantic parser, entity andrelationship linkers, and neuro-symbolic reasoner) and do not require end-to-end training data. NSQA achieves state-of-the-art performance on two prominent KBQA datasets based on DBpedia (QALD-9 and LC-QuAD1.0). Furthermore, our analysis emphasizes that AMR is a powerful tool for KBQA systems.
How meaning is represented in the brain is still one of the big open questions in neuroscience. Does a word (e.g., bird) always have the same representation, or does the task under which the word is processed alter its representation (answering can you eat it? versus can it fly?)? The brain activity of subjects who read the same word while performing different semantic tasks has been shown to differ across tasks. However, it is still not understood how the task itself contributes to this difference. In the current work, we study Magnetoencephalography (MEG) brain recordings of participants tasked with answering questions about concrete nouns. We investigate the effect of the task (i.e. the question being asked) on the processing of the concrete noun by predicting the millisecond-resolution MEG recordings as a function of both the semantics of the noun and the task. Using this approach, we test several hypotheses about the task-stimulus interactions by comparing the zero-shot predictions made by these hypotheses for novel tasks and nouns not seen during training. We find that incorporating the task semantics significantly improves the prediction of MEG recordings, across participants. The improvement occurs 475-550ms after the participants first see the word, which corresponds to what is considered to be the ending time of semantic processing for a word. These results suggest that only the end of semantic processing of a word is task-dependent, and pose a challenge for future research to formulate new hypotheses for earlier task effects as a function of the task and stimuli.
In this work, we give rigorous operational meaning to superposition of causal orders. This fits within a recent effort to understand how the standard operational perspective on quantum theory could be extended to include indefinite causality. The mainstream view, that of process matrices, takes a top-down approach to the problem, considering all causal correlations that are compatible with local quantum experiments. Conversely, we pursue a bottom-up approach, investigating how the concept of indefiniteness emerges from specific characteristics of generic operational theories. Specifically, we pin down the operational phenomenology of the notion of non-classical (e.g. coherent) control, which we then use to formalise a theory-independent notion of control (e.g. superposition) of causal orders. To validate our framework, we show how salient examples from the literature can be captured in our framework.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
