SemEval-2010 task 8: multi-way classification of semantic relations between pairs of nominals

ABSTRACT

We present a brief overview of the main challenges in the extraction of semantic relations from English text, and discuss the shortcomings of previous data sets and shared tasks. This leads us to introduce a new task, which will be part of SemEval-2010: multi-way classification of mutually exclusive semantic relations between pairs of common nominals. The task is designed to compare different approaches to the problem and to provide a standard testbed for future research, which can benefit many applications in Natural Language Processing.

References

1. Timothy Chklovski and Patrick Pantel. 2004. VerbOcean: Mining the web for fine-grained semantic verb relations. In Proc. EMNLP 2004, pages 33--40.
2. Dmitry Davidov and Ari Rappoport. 2008. Classification of semantic relationships between nominals using pattern clusters. In Proc. ACL-08: HLT, pages 227--235.
3. Charles J. Fillmore, Christopher R. Johnson, and Miriam R. L. Petruck. 2003. Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography, 16:235--250.
4. Charles J. Fillmore. 2002. FrameNet and the linking between semantic and syntactic relations. In Proc. COLING 2002, pages 28--36.
5. Daniel Gildea and Daniel Jurafsky. 2002. Automatic labeling of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 28(3):245--288.
6. Roxana Girju, Dan Moldovan, Marta Tatu, and Dan Antohe. 2005. On the semantics of noun compounds. Computer Speech and Language, 19:479--496.
7. Roxana Girju, Preslav Nakov, Vivi Nastase, Stan Szpakowicz, Peter Turney, and Deniz Yuret. 2007. SemEval-2007 task 04: Classification of semantic relations between nominals. In Proc. 4th Semantic Evaluation Workshop (SemEval-2007).
8. Roxana Girju, Preslav Nakov, Vivi Nastase, Stan Szpakowicz, Peter Turney, and Deniz Yuret. 2008. Classification of semantic relations between nominals. Language Resources and Evaluation. In print.
9. Marti A. Hearst. 1992. Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proc. COLING 92, pages 539--545.
10. Sophia Katrenko and Pieter Adriaans. 2008. Semantic types of some generic relation arguments: Detection and evaluation. In Proc. ACL-08: HLT, Short Papers, pages 185--188.
11. Su Nam Kim and Timothy Baldwin. 2005. Automatic interpretation of noun compounds using WordNet similarity. In Proc. IJCAI, pages 945--956.
12. George Lakoff. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
13. Maria Lapata. 2002. The disambiguation of nominalisations. Computational Linguistics, 28:357--388.
14. Dan Moldovan, Adriana Badulescu, Marta Tatu, Daniel Antohe, and Roxana Girju. 2004. Models for the semantic classification of noun phrases. In HLT-NAACL 2004: Workshop on Computational Lexical Semantics, pages 60--67.
15. Preslav Nakov and Marti A. Hearst. 2008. Solving relational similarity problems using the web as a corpus. In Proc. ACL-08: HLT, pages 452--460.
16. Vivi Nastase and Stan Szpakowicz. 2003. Exploring noun-modifier semantic relations. In Fifth International Workshop on Computational Semantics (IWCS-5), pages 285--301.
17. Vivi Nastase, Jelber Sayyad-Shirabad, Marina Sokolova, and Stan Szpakowicz. 2006. Learning noun-modifier semantic relations with corpus-based and WordNetbased features. In Proc. AAAI, pages 781--787.
18. Diarmuid Ó Séaghdha and Ann Copestake. 2008. Semantic classification with distributional kernels. In Proc. COLING 2008, pages 649--656.
19. Martha Palmer, Dan Gildea, and Paul Kingsbury. 2005. The Proposition Bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31(1):71--106.
20. Patrick Pantel and Marco Pennacchiotti. 2006. Espresso: Leveraging generic patterns for automatically harvesting semantic relations. In Proc. COLING/ACL, pages 113--120.
21. Siddharth Patwardhan and Ellen Riloff. 2007. Effective information extraction with semantic affinity patterns and relevant regions. In Proc. EMNLP-CoNLL), pages 717--727.
22. Barbara Rosario and Marti Hearst. 2001. Classifying the semantic relations in noun compounds via a domain-specific lexical hierarchy. In Proc. EMNLP 2001, pages 82--90.
23. Barbara Rosario, Marti Hearst, and Charles Fillmore. 2002. The descent of hierarchy, and selection in relational semantics. In Proc. ACL-02, pages 247--254.
24. Matthew Stephens, Mathew Palakal, Snehasis Mukhopadhyay, Rajeev Raje, and Javed Mostafa. 2001. Detecting gene relations from Medline abstracts. In Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, pages 483--495.
25. Peter D. Turney and Michael L. Littman. 2005. Corpusbased learning of analogies and semantic relations. Machine Learning, 60(1--3):251--278.
26. Peter D. Turney. 2005. Measuring semantic similarity by latent relational analysis. In Proc. IJCAI, pages 1136--1141.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Artificial intelligence

    • Knowledge representation and reasoning

      • Semantic networks

    • Natural language processing

  • Machine learning

    • Learning paradigms

      • Supervised learning

        • Supervised learning by classification

    • Learning settings

    • Machine learning approaches

      • Classification and regression trees

  • Modeling and simulation

    • Model development and analysis

      • Model verification and validation