Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2020
DOI: 10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.58
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning to Tag OOV Tokens by Integrating Contextual Representation and Background Knowledge

Abstract: Neural-based context-aware models for slot tagging have achieved state-of-the-art performance. However, the presence of OOV(outof-vocab) words significantly degrades the performance of neural-based models, especially in a few-shot scenario. In this paper, we propose a novel knowledge-enhanced slot tagging model to integrate contextual representation of input text and the large-scale lexical background knowledge. Besides, we use multilevel graph attention to explicitly model lexical relations. The experiments s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(12 reference statements)
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We classify the existing methods of detecting OOD intents into two main categories, supervised and unsupervised OOD detection. Supervised OOD detection (Scheirer et al, 2013;Fei and Liu, 2016;Kim and Kim, 2018;Larson et al, 2019;He et al, 2020c;Zheng et al, 2020) represents that there are extensive labeled OOD samples in the training data while unsupervised OOD detection (Breunig et al, 2000;Bendale and Boult, 2016;Hendrycks and Gimpel, 2017;Shu et al, 2017;Lee et al, 2018;Ren et al, 2019;Lin and Xu, 2019) means few or no labeled OOD samples except for labeled in-domain data. Unsupervised OOD detection makes it more complicated to identify unknown intents due to unseen and diverse semantic expressions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We classify the existing methods of detecting OOD intents into two main categories, supervised and unsupervised OOD detection. Supervised OOD detection (Scheirer et al, 2013;Fei and Liu, 2016;Kim and Kim, 2018;Larson et al, 2019;He et al, 2020c;Zheng et al, 2020) represents that there are extensive labeled OOD samples in the training data while unsupervised OOD detection (Breunig et al, 2000;Bendale and Boult, 2016;Hendrycks and Gimpel, 2017;Shu et al, 2017;Lee et al, 2018;Ren et al, 2019;Lin and Xu, 2019) means few or no labeled OOD samples except for labeled in-domain data. Unsupervised OOD detection makes it more complicated to identify unknown intents due to unseen and diverse semantic expressions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where FFNN c is a feedforward network mapping from R 2×d → R. Then we compute an additional sentinel vector c i (Yang and Mitchell, 2017;He et al, 2020) and also compute a score α i for it:…”
Section: Final Span Graph Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…OOV Recognition OOV aims to recognize unseen slot values in training set for pre-defined slot types, using character embedding (Liang et al, 2017a), copy mechanism (Zhao and Feng, 2018), few/zeroshot learning (Hu et al, 2019;Shah et al, 2019), transfer learning (Chen and Moschitti, 2019;He et al, 2020c) and background knowledge (Yang and Mitchell, 2017;He et al, 2020d), etc. Our proposed NSD task focuses on detecting unknown slot types, not just unseen values.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%