Recent advances in methods of lexical semantic relatedness - A survey
Natural Language Engineering, ISSN: 1351-3249, Vol: 19, Issue: 4, Page: 411-479
2013
- 50Citations
- 81Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Measuring lexical semantic relatedness is an important task in Natural Language Processing (NLP). It is often a prerequisite to many complex NLP tasks. Despite an extensive amount of work dedicated to this area of research, there is a lack of an up-to-date survey in the field. This paper aims to address this issue with a study that is focused on four perspectives: (i) a comparative analysis of background information resources that are essential for measuring lexical semantic relatedness; (ii) a review of the literature with a focus on recent methods that are not covered in previous surveys; (iii) discussion of the studies in the biomedical domain where novel methods have been introduced but inadequately communicated across the domain boundaries; and (iv) an evaluation of lexical semantic relatedness methods and a discussion of useful lessons for the development and application of such methods. In addition, we discuss a number of issues in this field and suggest future research directions. It is believed that this work will be a valuable reference to researchers of lexical semantic relatedness and substantially support the research activities in this field. Copyright © 2012 Cambridge University Press.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84871084586&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1351324912000125; http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1351324912000125; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1351324912000125; https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1351324912000125/type/journal_article; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/natural-language-engineering/article/recent-advances-in-methods-of-lexical-semantic-relatedness-a-survey/35BA94697B86B4B797FCF3ACCDE24FBD
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know