As a fundamental task of natural language processing, semantic role labeling (SRL) have attracted much attention of researchers in recent years. However, with increasing features being added into the studies, the performance growth trend of SRL is gradually slowing down. So new ways must be found to improve the performance of semantic analysis. Word sense information is useful for SRL task. But how to effectively make use of word sense information is a key issue. Referring to synergetics, we can regard semantic analysis process as competitive process of many semantics order parameters under coherent action and interactive collaboration of semantic role-related features and word sense-related features. Accordingly, we propose a semantic role labeling model with word sense information based on improved synergetic neural network (SNN). Our contributions are three-fold. Firstly, role-related features and word sense-related features are used to configure semantic order parameters of SNN. Secondly, network parameters are reconstructed which can reflect the relationship of driving and restraining each other between various linguistic features. Finally, we use an improved quantum particle swarm algorithm (QPSO) to realize the optimization of network parameter which has stronger search ability and faster convergence speed. By evaluating our model on the OntoNotes 2.0 corpus, the experiment results show the proposed model in this paper leads to a higher performance for SRL.
PunyakanokV., RothD. and YihW.T., The importance of syntactic parsing and inference in semantic role labeling, Computational Linguistics34(2) (2008), 257–287.
2.
ToutanovaK., HaghighiA. and ManningC.D., A global joint model for semantic role labeling, Computational Linguistics34(2) (1974), 161–191.
3.
WuD. and PascaleF., Can semantic role labeling improve SMT?In Proceedings of EAMT, 2009, pp. 218–225.
4.
ShenD. and LapataM., Using semantic roles to improve question answering, In Proceedings of EMNLP, 2007, pp. 12–21.
5.
NarayananS. and HarabagiuS., Question answering based on semantic structures, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), 2004, pp. 693–701.
6.
SurdeanuM., HarabagiuS., WilliamsJ. and AarsethP., Using predicate-argument structures for information extraction, ACL ’03 Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 1, 2003, 8–15.
7.
SurdeanuM., JohanssonR., MeyersA., MarquezL. and NivreJ., The CoNLL-shared task on joint parsing of syntactic and semantic dependencies, Twelfth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, 2008, pp. 159–177.
8.
Meza-RuizI. and RiedelS., Jointly identifying predicates, arguments and senses using markov logic, Human Language Technologies: Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 2009, pp. 155–163.
9.
CheW.X., LiuT. and LiY.Q., Improving semantic role labeling with word sense, Human Language Technologies: Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 2010, pp. 246–249.
10.
LimS., LeeC. and RaD., Dependency-based semantic role labeling using sequence labeling with a structural SVM, Pattern Recognition Letters34(6) (2013), 696–702.
11.
ZhaoH., ZhangX. and KitC., Integrative semantic dependency parsing via efficient large-scale feature selection, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research46(1) (2014), 203–233.
12.
LIJ.H., ZhouG.D., ZhuQ.M. and QianP.D., Semantic role labeling in Chinese language for nominal predicates, Journal of Software22(8) (2011), 1725–1737.
13.
NielsenR.D. and PradhanS., Mixing weak learners in semantic parsin, In Proceedings of EMNLP-2004, 2004, pp. 80–87.
14.
MàrquezL., ComasP., GiménezJ. and CatalaN., Semantic role labeling as sequential tagging, Proceedings of CoNLL-2005 Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2005, pp. 193–196.
15.
HakenH., Synergetic Computers and cognition–A top-down approach to neural Nets, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.
16.
ShaoJ., GaoJ. and YangX.Z., Synergetic face recognition algorithm based on ICA, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Neural Networks and Brain, Beijing, China, 2005, pp. 249–253.
17.
TongZ., TangL.H., IpH.H.S. and QiF., On relevance feedback and similarity measure for image retrieval with synergetic neural nets, Neurocomputing51(2) (2003), 105–124.
18.
HuangZ.H., Improved quantum particle swarm optimization for mangroves classification, Journal of Sensors2016 (2016), 8. Article ID 9264690.
19.
DangH.T. and PalmerM., The role of semantic roles in disambiguating verb senses, Proceedings of Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Ann Arbor Mi, 2005, pp. 26–28.
20.
JanHajič, CiaramitaM.,, JohanssonR, KawaharaD, MartíM.A, MàrquezL, MeyersA, NivreJ, PadóS, StěpánekJa, StraňákP, SurdeanuM, XueN and ZhangY, The conll-shared task: Syntactic and semantic dependencies in multiple languages, Proceedings of CoNLL, 2009, pp. 1–18.
21.
DahlmeierD., NgH.T. and SchultzT., Joint learning of preposition senses and semantic roles of prepositional phrases, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP, 2009, pp. 450–458.
22.
CheW.X. and LiuT., Jointly modeling wsd and srl with markov logic, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010, pp. 161–169.
23.
FangX., LiuB. and WangW., An improved attention parameter setting algorithm based on award learning mechanism, Computerence29(11) (2002), 195–197.
24.
MaX.L. and JiaoL.C., Reconstruction of order parameters based on immunity clonal strategy for image classification, In CamilhoAurélio, KamelMohamed, (Eds.),
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, 3211 (2004), pp. 455–462.
25.
ZouG., AoY.H., YaoW. and SunJ.X., An unbalanced parameters optimization of synergetic neural network based on differential evolution algorithm, Chinese Journal of Signal Processing26(12) (2010), 1768–1773.
26.
JiangZ.H. and DougalR.A., Synergetic control of pwer converters for pulse current charging of advanced batteries from a fuel cell power source, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics19(4) (2004), 1140–1150.
27.
GaoJ., DongH.M., ShaoJ. and ZhaoJ., Parameters optimization of synergetic recognition approach, Chinese Journal of Electronics14(2) (2005), 192–197.
28.
SunJ., FengB. and XuW., Particle swarm optimization with particles hng quantum behavior, Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation70 (2004), 325–331.
29.
ZhanD., LuH., HaoW. and JinD., Improving particle swarm optimization: Using neighbor heuristic and gaussian cloud learning, Intelligent Data Analysis20(1) (2016), 167–182.
30.
WangH.L. and ZhouG.D., Semantic role labeling of Chinese nominal predicates with dependency-driven constituent parse tree structure, Journal of Computer Science and Technology28(6) (2013), 1117–1126.
31.
PradhanS., HaciogluK., KruglerV., WardW., MartinW. and JurafskyD., Support vector learning for semantic argument classification, Machine Learning60(1-3) (2005), 11–39.
32.
GoodmanJ., Sequential conditional generalized iterative scaling, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002, pp. 9–16.
33.
ZhanD., LuH., HaoW. and JinD., Improving particle swarm optimization: Using neighbor heuristic and gaussian cloud learning, Intelligent Data Analysis20(1) (2016), 167–182.
34.
BagheriM., MiriM. and ShabakhtyN., Fuzzy reliability analysis using a new alpha level set optimization ap-proach based on particle swarm optimization, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems30(1) (2015), 235–244.
35.
YaoW.Q., Genetic Quantum particle swarm optimization algorithm for solving traveling salesman problems, Advances in Intelligent Systems & Computing (2014), 67–74.
36.
ChS., AnandN., PanigrahB.K. and MathurS., Streamflow forecasting by svm with quantum behaved particle swarm optimization, Neurocomputing101(3) (2013), 18–23.
37.
ZhangQ., WangZ., TaoF., SarkerB. and ChengL., Design of optimal attack-Angle for RLV reentry based on quantum particle swarm optimization, Advances in Mechanical Engineering2 (2014), 677–681.
38.
HosseinnezhadV., RafieeM., AhmadianM. and AmeliM.T., Species-based quantum particle swarm optimization for economic load dispatch, International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems63(12) (2014), 311–322.
39.
CoelhoL.S., Gaussian quantum-behaved particle swarm optimization approaches for constrained engineering design problem, Expert Systems with Applications37(2) (2010), 1676–1683.
40.
XiM., SunJ. and XuW., An improved quantum-behaved particle swarm optimization algorithm with weighted mean best position, Applied Mathematics and Computation205(2) (2008), 751–759.
41.
HovyE., MarcusM., PalmerM., RamshawL. and WeischedelR., Ontonotes: The 90% solution, In Proceedings of the human language technology conference of the NAACL, 2006, pp. 57–60.
42.
BengioY., Learning deep architectures for AI, Foundations & Trends in Machine Learning2(1) (2009), 1–127.
