Evaluating vector-space models of analogy

Vector-space representations provide geometric tools for reasoning about the similarity of a set of objects and their relationships. Recent machine learning methods for deriving vector-space embeddings of words (e.g., word2vec) have achieved considerable success in natural language processing. These vector spaces have also been shown to exhibit a surprising capacity to capture verbal analogies, with similar results for natural images, giving new life to a classic model of analogies as parallelograms that was first proposed by cognitive scientists. We evaluate the parallelogram model of analogy as applied to modern word embeddings, providing a detailed analysis of the extent to which this approach captures human relational similarity judgments in a large benchmark dataset. We find that that some semantic relationships are better captured than others. We then provide evidence for deeper limitations of the parallelogram model based on the intrinsic geometric constraints of vector spaces, paralleling classic results for first-order similarity.

[1]  C. Krumhansl Concerning the Applicability of Geometric Models to Similarity Data : The Interrelationship Between Similarity and Spatial Density , 2005 .

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

[3]  Jeffrey Dean,et al.  Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionality , 2013, NIPS.

[4]  Nina K Simms,et al.  Analogy, higher order thinking, and education. , 2015, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[5]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[6]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[7]  Mark Steyvers,et al.  Topics in semantic representation. , 2007, Psychological review.

[8]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Computational models of analogy. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[9]  Saif Mohammad,et al.  SemEval-2012 Task 2: Measuring Degrees of Relational Similarity , 2012, *SEMEVAL.

[10]  R. Chaffin,et al.  Cognitive and Psychometric Analysis of Analogical Problem Solving , 1990 .

[11]  Isaac I. Bejar,et al.  A Taxonomy of Semantic Relations , 1991 .

[12]  Yuting Zhang,et al.  Deep Visual Analogy-Making , 2015, NIPS.

[13]  George Mandler,et al.  Prototypicality norms for 28 semantic categories , 1980 .

[14]  D. Rumelhart,et al.  A model for analogical reasoning. , 1973 .

[15]  Soumith Chintala,et al.  Unsupervised Representation Learning with Deep Convolutional Generative Adversarial Networks , 2015, ICLR.

[16]  Dawn Chen,et al.  Bayesian analogy with relational transformations. , 2012, Psychological review.

[17]  Leonidas A A Doumas,et al.  A theory of the discovery and predication of relational concepts. , 2008, Psychological review.

[18]  S. McAdams,et al.  Perception of timbral analogies. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.