RAW-C: Relatedness of Ambiguous Words in Context (A New Lexical Resource for English)

Most words are ambiguous—they convey distinct meanings in different contexts—and even the meanings of unambiguous words are context-dependent. Both phenomena present a challenge for NLP. Recently, the advent of contextualized word embeddings has led to success on tasks involving lexical ambiguity, such as Word Sense Disambiguation. However, there are few tasks that directly evaluate how well these embeddings accommodate the continuous, dynamic nature of word meaning— particularly in a way that matches human intuitions. We introduce RAW-C, a dataset of graded, human relatedness judgments for 112 ambiguous words in context (with 672 sentence pairs total), as well as human estimates of sense dominance. The average inter-annotator agreement for the relatedness norms (assessed using a leave-one-annotatorout method) was 0.79. We then show that a measure of cosine distance, computed using contextualized embeddings from BERT and ELMo, correlates with human judgments, but that cosine distance also systematically underestimates how similar humans find uses of the same sense of a word to be, and systematically overestimates how similar humans find uses of different-sense homonyms. Finally, we propose a synthesis between psycholinguistic theories of the mental lexicon and computational models of lexical semantics.

[1]  Isabelle Dautriche Weaving an ambiguous lexicon , 2015 .

[2]  Felix Hill,et al.  SimVerb-3500: A Large-Scale Evaluation Set of Verb Similarity , 2016, EMNLP.

[3]  Massimo Poesio,et al.  Word Sense Distance in Human Similarity Judgements and Contextualised Word Embeddings , 2020, PAM.

[4]  A. Lopukhina,et al.  Metaphor Is Between Metonymy and Homonymy: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials , 2020, Frontiers in Psychology.

[5]  Krister Lindén Word Senses , 2005 .

[6]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[7]  S. Brown Polysemy in the Mental Lexicon , 2008 .

[8]  Susan A. Duffy,et al.  Effects of Prior Encounter and Global Discourse Bias on the Processing of Lexically Ambiguous Words: Evidence From Eye Fixations , 1994 .

[9]  Luke S. Zettlemoyer,et al.  Deep Contextualized Word Representations , 2018, NAACL.

[10]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  SenseBERT: Driving Some Sense into BERT , 2019, ACL.

[11]  Massimo Poesio,et al.  Assessing Polyseme Sense Similarity through Co-predication Acceptability and Contextualised Embedding Distance , 2020, STARSEM.

[12]  Luke S. Zettlemoyer,et al.  AllenNLP: A Deep Semantic Natural Language Processing Platform , 2018, ArXiv.

[13]  Ming-Wei Chang,et al.  BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding , 2019, NAACL.

[14]  Gemma Boleda,et al.  Putting Words in Context: LSTM Language Models and Lexical Ambiguity , 2019, ACL.

[15]  Felix Hill,et al.  SimLex-999: Evaluating Semantic Models With (Genuine) Similarity Estimation , 2014, CL.

[16]  Yiming Yang,et al.  XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understanding , 2019, NeurIPS.

[17]  Shari R. Baum,et al.  Disambiguating the ambiguity advantage effect in word recognition: An advantage for polysemous but not homonymous words , 2007, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[18]  Ekaterini Klepousniotou The Processing of Lexical Ambiguity: Homonymy and Polysemy in the Mental Lexicon , 2002, Brain and Language.

[19]  George A. Miller,et al.  A Semantic Concordance , 1993, HLT.

[20]  S. Thompson-Schill,et al.  Putting concepts into context , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  Susan Windisch Brown,et al.  Choosing Sense Distinctions for WSD: Psycholinguistic Evidence , 2008, ACL.

[22]  Mahesh Srinivasan,et al.  How concepts and conventions structure the lexicon: Cross-linguistic evidence from polysemy , 2014 .

[23]  Patrick Hanks,et al.  Do Word Meanings Exist? , 2000, Comput. Humanit..

[24]  Mohammad Taher Pilehvar,et al.  Language Models and Word Sense Disambiguation: An Overview and Analysis , 2020, ArXiv.

[25]  Christiane Fellbaum,et al.  Book Reviews: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database , 1999, CL.

[26]  Roberto Navigli,et al.  CSI: A Coarse Sense Inventory for 85% Word Sense Disambiguation , 2020, AAAI.

[27]  Mallorie Leinenger,et al.  Eye movements while reading biased homographs: Effects of prior encounter and biasing context on reducing the subordinate bias effect , 2013, Journal of cognitive psychology.

[28]  Elia Bruni,et al.  Multimodal Distributional Semantics , 2014, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[29]  Gregor Wiedemann,et al.  Does BERT Make Any Sense? Interpretable Word Sense Disambiguation with Contextualized Embeddings , 2019, KONVENS.

[30]  A. Lopukhina,et al.  The Mental Representation of Polysemy across Word Classes , 2018, Front. Psychol..

[31]  D. Titone,et al.  Making sense of word senses: the comprehension of polysemy depends on sense overlap. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Manaal Faruqui,et al.  Non-distributional Word Vector Representations , 2015, ACL.

[33]  D. Geeraerts Vagueness's puzzles, polysemy's vagaries , 1993 .

[34]  David Tuggy Ambiguity, polysemy, and vagueness , 1993 .

[35]  José Camacho-Collados,et al.  WiC: the Word-in-Context Dataset for Evaluating Context-Sensitive Meaning Representations , 2018, NAACL.

[36]  Katherine S. Binder,et al.  Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading , 1998 .

[37]  Andrew Y. Ng,et al.  Improving Word Representations via Global Context and Multiple Word Prototypes , 2012, ACL.

[38]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Modelling the effects of semantic ambiguity in word recognition , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[39]  J. Elman On the Meaning of Words and Dinosaur Bones: Lexical Knowledge Without a Lexicon , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[40]  Mahesh Srinivasan,et al.  Contextualized Word Embeddings Encode Aspects of Human-Like Word Sense Knowledge , 2020, COGALEX.

[41]  Jiangtian Li,et al.  Word Senses as Clusters of Meaning Modulations: A Computational Model of Polysemy , 2021, Cogn. Sci..

[42]  Evgeniy Gabrilovich,et al.  Large-scale learning of word relatedness with constraints , 2012, KDD.

[43]  Torsten Zesch,et al.  A survey of semantic relatedness evaluation datasets and procedures , 2019, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[44]  Nathan Schneider,et al.  (Re)construing Meaning in NLP , 2020, ACL.

[45]  Jeffrey Pennington,et al.  GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation , 2014, EMNLP.

[46]  Ehud Rivlin,et al.  Placing search in context: the concept revisited , 2002, TOIS.

[47]  Emily M. Bender,et al.  Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data , 2020, ACL.

[48]  Senja Pollak,et al.  SemEval-2020 Task 3: Graded Word Similarity in Context , 2020, SEMEVAL.