Lexical Features in Coreference Resolution: To be Used With Caution Lexical Features in Coreference Resolution: To be Used With Caution
Paper summary (Reposting under ACL 2017 version) Kind of a response/deeper dive into the durret/klein "easy victories" paper. Suggests that a) lexical features they used ("easy victories") are very prone to overfitting. They first show that several state of the art systems that use lexical features, trained on CoNLL data, perform poorly on wikiref, which was annotated using the same guidelines. Meanwhile the stanford sieve system performs about the same on both. Then they show that a high percentage of gold standard linked headwords in the test set have been seen in the training set, and that a much lower percentage of errors are in the training set, implying that lexical features just allow you to memorize what kinds of things can be linked. They suggest development of robust features, including using embeddings as lexical features, using lexical representations only for context, and on the evaluation side, using test sets that are different domains than the training set.
arxiv.org
arxiv-sanity.com
scholar.google.com
Lexical Features in Coreference Resolution: To be Used With Caution
Nafise Sadat Moosavi and Michael Strube
arXiv e-Print archive - 2017 via Local arXiv
Keywords: cs.CL

more

Loading...
Your comment:
Loading...
Your comment:


ShortScience.org allows researchers to publish paper summaries that are voted on and ranked!
About