Analogy completion has been a popular task in recent years for evaluating the semantic properties of word embeddings, but the standard methodology makes a number of assumptions about analogies that do not always hold, either in recent benchmark datasets or when expanding into other domains. Through an analysis of analogies in the biomedical domain, we identify three assumptions: that of a Single Answer for any given analogy, that the pairs involved describe the Same Relationship, and that each pair is Informative with respect to the other. We propose modifying the standard methodology to relax these assumptions by allowing for multiple correct answers, reporting MAP and MRR in addition to accuracy, and using multiple example pairs. We further present BMASS, a novel dataset for evaluating linguistic regularities in biomedical embeddings, and demonstrate that the relationships described in the dataset pose significant semantic challenges to current word embedding methods.
Analogical reasoning has been studied both on its own and as a component of downstream tasks, using a range of systems. Early work used rule-based systems for world knowledge @cite_20 and syntactic @cite_1 relationships. Supervised models were used for SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) analogies @cite_10 , and later for synonymy, antonymy, and some world knowledge @cite_13 @cite_11 . Analogical reasoning has also been used in support of downstream tasks, including word sense disambiguation @cite_21 and morphological analysis @cite_14 @cite_8 @cite_23 .
@cite_14 @cite_8 @cite_10 @cite_21 @cite_1 @cite_23 @cite_13 @cite_20 @cite_11
87318396 2167609405 2159495802 2075910053 2073610029 1998398906 2038227658 2121963504 2886424491
Among the diverse processes at work in human cognition, the ability to establish analogies plays a crucial role and is often evaluated via IQ tests where an incomplete sequence has to be completed with a suitable item. This has motivated the AI community for developing various computational models of analogy-making. A Boolean logic view of analogical proportions (a basic form of analogical statements of the form "a is to b as c is to d") has been recently proposed and extended to another logical proportion, namely paralogical proportion (stating that "what a and b have in common, c and d have it also"). When used in combination, these 2 proportions provide an enhanced power to complete IQ tests. This Boolean modeling essentially relies on the assessment of the differences and similarities between the items involved, and in the case of analogy, satisfies the expected properties of an analogical proportion. An extension to multiple-valued features has also been defined, reinforcing their scope of applications. It is then possible to complete, in a deterministic manner, some incomplete proportions where the last item d is missing. In this paper, we show how this can be the basis of a simple inference paradigm that provides a rigorous way to solve representative analogy-based IQ tests by computing the missing items rather than by choosing in a list of options. The result of the analogical paralogical inference depends on the way the items are represented. The paper discusses how this approach can be used in analogy-making for both determining missing items in proportions and laying bare the relation linking the components of such proportions. The novelty of the approach is stressed w.r.t. other proposals existing in the literature. Many AI researchers and cognitive scientists have argued that analogy is the core of cognition. The most influential work on computational modeling of analogy-making is Structure Mapping Theory (SMT) and its implementation in the Structure Mapping Engine (SME). A limitation of SME is the requirement for complex hand-coded representations. We introduce the Latent Relation Mapping Engine (LRME), which combines ideas from SME and Latent Relational Analysis (LRA) in order to remove the requirement for hand-coded representations. LRME builds analogical mappings between lists of words, using a large corpus of raw text to automatically discover the semantic relations among the words. We evaluate LRME on a set of twenty analogical mapping problems, ten based on scientific analogies and ten based on common metaphors. LRME achieves human-level performance on the twenty problems. We compare LRME with a variety of alternative approaches and find that they are not able to reach the same level of performance. Recognizing analogies, synonyms, antonyms, and associations appear to be four distinct tasks, requiring distinct NLP algorithms. In the past, the four tasks have been treated independently, using a wide variety of algorithms. These four semantic classes, however, are a tiny sample of the full range of semantic phenomena, and we cannot afford to create ad hoc algorithms for each semantic phenomenon; we need to seek a unified approach. We propose to subsume a broad range of phenomena under analogies. To limit the scope of this paper, we restrict our attention to the subsumption of synonyms, antonyms, and associations. We introduce a supervised corpus-based machine learning algorithm for classifying analogous word pairs, and we show that it can solve multiple-choice SAT analogy questions, TOEFL synonym questions, ESL synonym-antonym questions, and similar-associated-both questions from cognitive psychology. Analogical learning is based on a two-step inference process: (i) computation of a structural mapping between a new and a memorized situation; (ii) transfer of knowledge from the known to the unknown situation. This approach requires the ability to search for and exploit such mappings, hence the need to properly define analogical relationships, and to efficiently implement their computation. In this paper, we propose a unified definition for the notion of (formal) analogical proportion, which applies to a wide range of algebraic structures. We show that this definition is suitable for learning in domains involving large databases of structured data, as is especially the case in Natural Language Processing (NLP). We then present experimental results obtained on two morphological analysis tasks which demonstrate the flexibility and accuracy of this approach. Abstract Are morphological patterns learned in the form of rules? Some models deny this, attributing all morphology to analogical mechanisms. The dual mechanism model (Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1998). On language and connectionism: analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28 , 73–193) posits that speakers do internalize rules, but that these rules are few and cover only regular processes; the remaining patterns are attributed to analogy. This article advocates a third approach, which uses multiple stochastic rules and no analogy. We propose a model that employs inductive learning to discover multiple rules, and assigns them confidence scores based on their performance in the lexicon. Our model is supported over the two alternatives by new “wug test” data on English past tenses, which show that participant ratings of novel pasts depend on the phonological shape of the stem, both for irregulars and, surprisingly, also for regulars. The latter observation cannot be explained under the dual mechanism approach, which derives all regulars with a single rule. To evaluate the alternative hypothesis that all morphology is analogical, we implemented a purely analogical model, which evaluates novel pasts based solely on their similarity to existing verbs. Tested against experimental data, this analogical model also failed in key respects: it could not locate patterns that require abstract structural characterizations, and it favored implausible responses based on single, highly similar exemplars. We conclude that speakers extend morphological patterns based on abstract structural properties, of a kind appropriately described with rules. This paper investigates the use of commonsense reasoning to understand texts involving stereotypical activities or scripts. We present a system that understands news stories involving four terrorism scripts. The system (1) builds a commonsense reasoning problem given an information extraction template representing a terrorist incident, and (2) uses commonsense reasoning and a commonsense knowledge base to build a model of the terrorist incident. The reasoning problem, commonsense knowledge base, and model are expressed in the classical logic event calculus. The system was developed using the MUC3 and MUC4 development data set. We present the results of running the system on the MUC3 and MUC4 test data sets, using manually generated answer key templates and templates generated automatically by two MUC4 information extraction systems. We present a detailed analysis of the models produced by the system given automatically generated templates. We present methods for answering questions based on the models produced by our system. We assess the portability of the system by extending it to handle 10 scripts frequent in Project Gutenberg American literature texts. We present an algorithm for learning from unlabeled text, based on the Vector Space Model (VSM) of information retrieval, that can solve verbal analogy questions of the kind found in the SAT college entrance exam. A verbal analogy has the form A:B::C:D, meaning "A is to B as C is to D"; for example, mason:stone::carpenter:wood. SAT analogy questions provide a word pair, A:B, and the problem is to select the most analogous word pair, C:D, from a set of five choices. The VSM algorithm correctly answers 47 of a collection of 374 college-level analogy questions (random guessing would yield 20 correct; the average college-bound senior high school student answers about 57 correctly). We motivate this research by applying it to a difficult problem in natural language processing, determining semantic relations in noun-modifier pairs. The problem is to classify a noun-modifier pair, such as "laser printer", according to the semantic relation between the noun (printer) and the modifier (laser). We use a supervised nearest-neighbour algorithm that assigns a class to a given noun-modifier pair by finding the most analogous noun-modifier pair in the training data. With 30 classes of semantic relations, on a collection of 600 labeled noun-modifier pairs, the learning algorithm attains an F value of 26.5 (random guessing: 3.3 ). With 5 classes of semantic relations, the F value is 43.2 (random: 20 ). The performance is state-of-the-art for both verbal analogies and noun-modifier relations. While most approaches to unsupervised morphology acquisition often rely on metrics based on information theory for identifying morphemes, we describe a novel approach relying on the notion of formal analogy, that is, a relation between four forms, such as: reader is to doer as reading is to doing. Our assumption is that formal analogies identify pairs of morphologically related words, for instance reader reading and doer doing. Based on this assumption, our approach simply consists in identifying all the formal analogies involving the words in a lexicon. It turned out that for large lexicons, this happens to be a very time consuming task. Therefore, we report our attempts in designing practical systems based on the analogical principle. We applied our systems on the five languages of the shared task. The learning is made in an unsupervised manner, making use of the supplied lexicons only. Given a partial description like "she opened the hood of the car," humans can reason about the situation and anticipate what might come next ("then, she examined the engine"). In this paper, we introduce the task of grounded commonsense inference, unifying natural language inference and commonsense reasoning. We present SWAG, a new dataset with 113k multiple choice questions about a rich spectrum of grounded situations. To address the recurring challenges of the annotation artifacts and human biases found in many existing datasets, we propose Adversarial Filtering (AF), a novel procedure that constructs a de-biased dataset by iteratively training an ensemble of stylistic classifiers, and using them to filter the data. To account for the aggressive adversarial filtering, we use state-of-the-art language models to massively oversample a diverse set of potential counterfactuals. Empirical results demonstrate that while humans can solve the resulting inference problems with high accuracy (88 ), various competitive models struggle on our task. We provide comprehensive analysis that indicates significant opportunities for future research.