RG-65 Test Collection (State of the art)

From ACL Wiki
Revision as of 12:25, 15 January 2014 by Scottyih (talk | contribs) (References)

Jump to: navigation, search
  • state of the art in Rubenstein & Goodenough (RG-65) dataset
  • 65 word pairs;
  • Similarity of each pair is scored according to a scale from 0 to 4 (the higher the "similarity of meaning," the higher the number);
  • The similarity values in the dataset are the means of judgments made by 51 subjects [Rubenstein and Goodenough, 1965].
  • see also: Similarity (State of the art)

Table of results

Algorithm Reference for algorithm Reference for reported results Type Spearman correlation (ρ) Pearson correlation (r)
ADW Pilehvar et al. (2013) Pilehvar et al. (2013) Knowledge-based 0.868 0.810
PPR Hughes and Ramage (2007) Hughes and Ramage (2007) Knowledge-based 0.838 -
SSA Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Corpus-based 0.833 0.861
PPR Agirre et al. (2009) Agirre et al. (2009) Knowledge-based 0.830 -
H&S Hirst and St-Onge (1998) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.813 0.732
Roget Jarmasz (2003) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.804 0.818
J&C Jiang and Conrath (1997) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.804 0.731
WNE Jarmasz (2003) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.801 0.787
L&C Leacock and Chodorow (1998) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.797 0.852
Lin Lin (1998) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Corpus-based 0.788 0.834
ESA* Gabrilovich and Markovitch (2007) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Corpus-based 0.749 0.716
SOCPMI* Islam and Inkpen (2006) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Corpus-based 0.741 0.729
Resnik Resnik (1995) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Knowledge-based 0.731 0.800
WLM Milne and Witten (2008) Milne and Witten (2008) Knowledge-based 0.640 -
LSA* Landauer et al. (1997) Hassan and Mihalcea (2011) Corpus-based 0.609 0.644
WikiRelate Strube and Ponzetto (2006) Strube and Ponzetto (2006) Knowledge-based - 0.530

Note: values reported by (Hassan and Mihalcea, 2011) are "based on the collected raw data from the respective authors", and those highlighted by (*) are re-implementations.


  • Listed alphabetically.

Agirre, Eneko, Enrique Alfonseca, Keith Hall, Jana Kravalova, Marius Pasca, Aitor Soroa: A Study on Similarity and Relatedness Using Distributional and WordNet-based Approaches. HLT-NAACL 2009: 19-27

Gabrilovich, Evgeniy, and Shaul Markovitch, Computing Semantic Relatedness using Wikipedia-based Explicit Semantic Analysis, Proceedings of The 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Hyderabad, India, 2007.

Hassan, Samer, and Rada Mihalcea: Semantic Relatedness Using Salient Semantic Analysis. AAAI 2011

Hirst, Graeme and David St-Onge. Lexical chains as representations of context for the detection and correction of malapropisms. In Christiane Fellbaum, editor, WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pages 305–332, 1998.

Hughes, Thad, Daniel Ramage, Lexical Semantic Relatedness with Random Graph Walks. EMNLP-CoNLL 2007: 581-589.

Islam, A., and Inkpen, D. 2006. Second order co-occurrence pmi for determining the semantic similarity of words. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) 1033–1038.

Jarmasz, M. 2003. Roget’s thesaurus as a Lexical Resource for Natural Language Processing. Ph.D. Dissertation, Ottawa Carleton Institute for Computer Science, School of Information Technology and Engineering, University of Ottawa.

Jiang, Jay J. and David W. Conrath. Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. In Proceedings of International Conference on Research in Computational Linguistics (ROCLING X), Taiwan, pages 19–33, 1997.

Landauer, T. K.; L, T. K.; Laham, D.; Rehder, B.; and Schreiner, M. E. 1997. How well can passage meaning be derived without using word order? a comparison of latent semantic analysis and humans.

Leacock, Claudia and Martin Chodorow. Combining local context and WordNet similarity for word sense identification. In Christiane Fellbaum, editor, WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pages 265–283, 1998.

Lin, Dekang. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning, Madison,WI, pages 296–304, 1998.

Milne, David, and Ian H. Witten, An Effective, Low-Cost Measure of Semantic Relatedness Obtained from Wikipedia Links, In Proceedings of AAAI 2008.

Pilehvar, M.T., D. Jurgens and R. Navigli. Align, Disambiguate and Walk: A Unified Approach for Measuring Semantic Similarity. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2013), Sofia, Bulgaria, August 4-9, 2013, pp. 1341-1351.

Resnik, Philip. Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 448–453, Montreal, Canada, 1995.

Rubenstein, Herbert, and John B. Goodenough. Contextual correlates of synonymy. Communications of the ACM, 8(10):627–633, 1965.

Strube, Michael, Simone Paolo Ponzetto: WikiRelate! Computing Semantic Relatedness Using Wikipedia. AAAI 2006: 1419-1424

Yih, W. and Qazvinian, V. (2012). Measuring Word Relatedness Using Heterogeneous Vector Space Models. Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT 2012).