2012 IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop (SLT) 2012
DOI: 10.1109/slt.2012.6424268
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two-layer mutually reinforced random walk for improved multi-party meeting summarization

Abstract: This paper proposes an improved approach of summarization for spoken multi-party interaction, in which a two-layer graph with utterance-to-utterance, speaker-to-speaker, and speakerto-utterance relations is constructed. Each utterance and each speaker are represented as a node in the utterance-layer and speaker-layer of the graph respectively, and the edge between two nodes is weighted by the similarity between the two utterances, the two speakers, or the utterance and the speaker. The relation between utteran… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We first compare our model with three widely used clustering methods: k-means clustering, DBSCAN clustering [7] and aforementioned AP clustering [11]. Besides, we also adopt the mutually reinforced random walk model [4] (denoted as MRRW) to judge entity typicality based on the hypothesis that typical exemplars are those who are similar to the other members of its category and dissimilar to members of the contrast categories. Finally, we also test a limited version of our approach called independent ILP (denoted as I-ILP) that separately identifies exemplars of each input sets based on our proposed ILP framework.…”
Section: Baselinesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We first compare our model with three widely used clustering methods: k-means clustering, DBSCAN clustering [7] and aforementioned AP clustering [11]. Besides, we also adopt the mutually reinforced random walk model [4] (denoted as MRRW) to judge entity typicality based on the hypothesis that typical exemplars are those who are similar to the other members of its category and dissimilar to members of the contrast categories. Finally, we also test a limited version of our approach called independent ILP (denoted as I-ILP) that separately identifies exemplars of each input sets based on our proposed ILP framework.…”
Section: Baselinesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A feature graph is constructed to represent the two documents. Graph‐based summarization approaches have been used for many years . In our approach, the nodes in the graph represent the features, and the edges represent the relationships between features.…”
Section: The Summarization Modulementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Graph-based summarization approaches have been used for many years. [35][36][37] In our approach, the nodes in the graph represent the features, and the edges represent the relationships between features. Common nodes represent the topic keywords that occur in both documents.…”
Section: Feature Graph Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and E ws correspond to slot-to-slot relations, wordto-word relations, and word-to-slot relations respectively (Chen and Metze, 2012;Chen and Metze, 2013).…”
Section: Knowledge Graphsmentioning
confidence: 99%