Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management 2019
DOI: 10.1145/3357384.3358100
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Large Margin Prototypical Network for Few-shot Relation Classification with Fine-grained Features

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To overcome the catastrophic forgetting problem, Cai et al [20] introduced a two-phase prototypical network, which adapted prototype attention alignment and triplet loss to dynamically recognize the novel relations with a few support instances without catastrophic forgetting. Similarly, Fan et al [21] proposed the large-margin prototypical network with fine-grained features (LM-ProtoNet), which could generalize well on few-shot relations classification. To learn predictive and robust relation representations from the training phase, Ding et al [22] proposed prototype learning methods with geometric interpretation, where the prototypes were unit vectors uniformly dispersed in a unit ball, and the sentence embeddings were centered at the end of their corresponding prototype vectors.…”
Section: Few-shot Relation Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To overcome the catastrophic forgetting problem, Cai et al [20] introduced a two-phase prototypical network, which adapted prototype attention alignment and triplet loss to dynamically recognize the novel relations with a few support instances without catastrophic forgetting. Similarly, Fan et al [21] proposed the large-margin prototypical network with fine-grained features (LM-ProtoNet), which could generalize well on few-shot relations classification. To learn predictive and robust relation representations from the training phase, Ding et al [22] proposed prototype learning methods with geometric interpretation, where the prototypes were unit vectors uniformly dispersed in a unit ball, and the sentence embeddings were centered at the end of their corresponding prototype vectors.…”
Section: Few-shot Relation Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, a large number of contrastive losses such as triplet loss [38] and large margin nearest neighbor (LMNN) [39] are proposed to maximize the similarity between positive pairs while minimizing those of the negatives. Inspired by these works, contrastive loss such as [40], [41] are leveraged to learn a more discriminant embedding space in episodic training for metric-learning-based few-shot classification. The most related work to the present study is the additive margin loss proposed in [40], which directly adds a margin on the distance between different classes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…WLMNC loss adopted in our work shares a similar idea to the classrelevant additive margin loss; however, it is implemented by the weighted hinge loss and does not leverage any additional semantic information. Another relevant work is the triplet loss applied to prototypical networks in [41], which attempts to maintain a large margin between the distances from a given prototype of the support set to a same-labeled query example and to a differently labeled query example. This triplet loss is different from our proposed LMNC (WLMNC) loss, which aims to maintain a large margin between the distances from a given query example to its target prototype and to differently labeled prototypes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the example shown in Figure 2, we can see that, in the new scenario of distantly supervised FSRC, both support and query sets are practically noisy. If a single false positive instance is sampled as a query like previous studies (Han et al, 2018;Fan et al, 2019;Gao et al, 2019), it cannot be classified into an appropriate relation in the support set. Since a few-shot model is optimized by minimizing the loss of the predictions over the queries, sampling a mislabeled instance as the query will inevitably mislead the optimization process.…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The query set Q gives rise to the major difference with respect to the formulation of conventional FSRC in Han et al (2018), Fan et al (2019), andGao et al (2019). As DS data tends to have mislabeled instances, if the previous formulation is followed, a mislabeled instance is likely to be sampled as the query instance; in this case, a FSRC model may be intermittently confused during training by the mislabeled query instances, as they substantially deviate from real ones.…”
Section: Task Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%