Content deleted Content added
adding links to references using Google Scholar |
adding links to references using Google Scholar |
||
Line 23:
==Simplified Lesk algorithm==
In Simplified Lesk algorithm,<ref>Kilgarriff and J. Rosenzweig. 2000. [http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2000/pdf/8.pdf English SENSEVAL:Report and Results]. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Language Resourcesand Evaluation, LREC, Athens, Greece.</ref> the correct meaning of each word in a given context is determined individually by locating the sense that overlaps the most between its dictionary definition and the given context. Rather than simultaneously determining the meanings of all words in a given context, this approach tackles each word individually, independent of the meaning of the other words occurring in the same context.
"A comparative evaluation performed by Vasilescu et al. (2004)<ref>Florentina Vasilescu, Philippe Langlais, and Guy Lapalme.
2004. [http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2004/pdf/219.pdf Evaluating Variants of the Lesk Approach for Disambiguating Words]. LREC, Portugal.</ref> has shown that the simplified Lesk algorithm can significantly outperform the original definition of the algorithm, both in terms of precision and efficiency. By evaluating the disambiguation algorithms on the Senseval-2 English all words data, they measure a 58% precision using the simplified Lesk algorithm compared to the only 42% under the original algorithm.
Note: Vasilescu et al. implementation considers a back-off strategy for words not covered by the algorithm, consisting of the most frequent sense defined in WordNet. This means that words for which all their possible meanings lead to zero overlap with current context or with other word definitions are by default assigned sense number one in WordNet."<ref>Agirre, Eneko & Philip Edmonds (eds.). 2006. [https://books.google.com/books?id=GLck75U20pAC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=Lesk&f=false Word Sense Disambiguation: Algorithms and Applications]. Dordrecht: Springer. www.wsdbook.org</ref>
'''Simplified LESK Algorithm with smart default word sense (Vasilescu et al., 2004)'''<ref>Florentina Vasilescu, Philippe Langlais, and Guy Lapalme.
2004. [http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2004/pdf/219.pdf Evaluating Variants of the Lesk Approach for Disambiguating Words]. LREC, Portugal.</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|-
Line 53:
Unfortunately, Lesk’s approach is very sensitive to the exact wording of definitions, so the absence of a certain word can radically change the results. Further, the algorithm determines overlaps only among the glosses of the senses being considered. This is a significant limitation in that dictionary glosses tend to be fairly short and do not provide sufficient vocabulary to relate fine-grained sense distinctions.
A lot of work has appeared offering different modifications of this algorithm. These works use other resources for analysis (thesauruses, synonyms dictionaries or morphological and syntactic models): for instance, it may use such information as synonyms, different derivatives, or words from definitions of words from definitions.<ref>Alexander Gelbukh, Grigori Sidorov. [https://www.gelbukh.com/CV/Publications/2004/NTI-2004-senses.htm Automatic resolution of ambiguity of word senses in dictionary definitions] (in Russian). J. Nauchno-Tehnicheskaya Informaciya (NTI), ISSN 0548-0027, ser. 2, N 3, 2004, pp. 10–15.</ref>
There are a lot of studies concerning Lesk and its extensions:<ref>Roberto Navigli. [http://www.dsi.uniroma1.it/~navigli/pubs/ACM_Survey_2009_Navigli.pdf ''Word Sense Disambiguation: A Survey]'', ACM Computing Surveys, 41(2), 2009, pp. 1–69.</ref>
| |||