APrimeronNeuralNetworkModelsforNaturalLanguageProcessing资源-CSDN文库

5星 · 超过95%的资源需积分: 10 17 浏览量 2018-01-24 20:09:55 上传评论 1 收藏 702KB PDF 举报

资源推荐

资源详情

资源评论

A Primer on Neural Network Models

for Natural Language Processing

Yoav Goldberg

Draft as of October 5, 2015.

The most up-to-date version of this manuscript is available at http://www.cs.biu.

ac.il/

yogo/nnlp.pdf. Major updates will be published on arxiv periodically.

I welcome any comments you may have regarding the content and presentation. If you

spot a missing reference or have relevant work you’d like to see mentioned, do let me know.

first.last@gmail

Abstract

Over the past few years, neural networks have re-emerged as powerful machine-learning

models, yielding state-of-the-art results in ﬁelds such as image recognition and speech

processing. More recently, neural network models started to be applied also to textual

natural language signals, again with very promising results. This tutorial surveys neural

network models from the perspective of natural language processing research, in an attempt

to bring natural-language researchers up to speed with the neural techniques. The tutorial

covers input encoding for natural language tasks, feed-forward networks, convolutional

networks, recurrent networks and recursive networks, as well as the computation graph

abstraction for automatic gradient computation.

1. Introduction

For a long time, core NLP techniques were dominated by machine-learning approaches that

used linear models such as support vector machines or logistic regression, trained over very

high dimensional yet very sparse feature vectors.

Recently, the ﬁeld has seen some success in switching from such linear models over

sparse inputs to non-linear neural-network models over dense inputs. While most of the

neural network techniques are easy to apply, sometimes as almost drop-in replacements of

the old linear classiﬁers, there is in many cases a strong barrier of entry. In this tutorial I

attempt to provide NLP practitioners (as well as newcomers) with the basic background,

jargon, tools and methodology that will allow them to understand the principles behind

the neural network models and apply them to their own work. This tutorial is expected

to be self-contained, while presenting the diﬀerent approaches under a uniﬁed notation and

framework. It repeats a lot of material which is available elsewhere. It also points to

external sources for more advanced topics when appropriate.

This primer is not intended as a comprehensive resource for those that will go on and

develop the next advances in neural-network machinery (though it may serve as a good entry

point). Rather, it is aimed at those readers who are interested in taking the existing, useful

technology and applying it in useful and creative ways to their favourite NLP problems. For

more in-depth, general discussion of neural networks, the theory behind them, advanced

optimization methods and other advanced topics, the reader is referred to other existing

resources. In particular, the book by Bengio et al (2015) is highly recommended.

Scope The focus is on applications of neural networks to language processing tasks. How-

ever, some subareas of language processing with neural networks were decidedly left out of

scope of this tutorial. These include the vast literature of language modeling and acoustic

modeling, the use of neural networks for machine translation, and multi-modal applications

combining language and other signals such as images and videos (e.g. caption generation).

Caching methods for eﬃcient runtime performance, methods for eﬃcient training with large

output vocabularies and attention models are also not discussed. Word embeddings are dis-

cussed only to the extent that is needed to understand in order to use them as inputs for

other models. Other unsupervised approaches, including autoencoders and recursive au-

toencoders, also fall out of scope. While some applications of neural networks for language

modeling and machine translation are mentioned in the text, their treatment is by no means

comprehensive.

A Note on Terminology The word “feature” is used to refer to a concrete, linguistic

input such as a word, a suﬃx, or a part-of-speech tag. For example, in a ﬁrst-order part-

of-speech tagger, the features might be “current word, previous word, next word, previous

part of speech”. The term “input vector” is used to refer to the actual input that is fed

to the neural-network classiﬁer. Similarly, “input vector entry” refers to a speciﬁc value

of the input. This is in contrast to a lot of the neural networks literature in which the

word “feature” is overloaded between the two uses, and is used primarily to refer to an

input-vector entry.

Mathematical Notation I use bold upper case letters to represent matrices (X, Y,

Z), and bold lower-case letters to represent vectors (b). When there are series of related

matrices and vectors (for example, where each matrix corresponds to a diﬀerent layer in

the network), superscript indices are used (W

, W

). For the rare cases in which we want

indicate the power of a matrix or a vector, a pair of brackets is added around the item to

be exponentiated: (W)

, (W

)

. Unless otherwise stated, vectors are assumed to be row

vectors. We use [v

; v

] to denote vector concatenation.

2. Neural Network Architectures

Neural networks are powerful learning models. We will discuss two kinds of neural network

architectures, that can be mixed and matched – feed-forward networks and Recurrent /

Recursive networks. Feed-forward networks include networks with fully connected layers,

such as the multi-layer perceptron, as well as networks with convolutional and pooling

layers. All of the networks act as classiﬁers, but each with diﬀerent strengths.

Fully connected feed-forward neural networks (Section 4) are non-linear learners that

can, for the most part, be used as a drop-in replacement wherever a linear learner is used.

This includes binary and multiclass classiﬁcation problems, as well as more complex struc-

tured prediction problems (Section 8). The non-linearity of the network, as well as the

ability to easily integrate pre-trained word embeddings, often lead to superior classiﬁcation

accuracy. A series of works (Chen & Manning, 2014; Weiss, Alberti, Collins, & Petrov,

2015; Pei, Ge, & Chang, 2015; Durrett & Klein, 2015) managed to obtain improved syntac-

tic parsing results by simply replacing the linear model of a parser with a fully connected

feed-forward network. Straight-forward applications of a feed-forward network as a classi-

ﬁer replacement (usually coupled with the use of pre-trained word vectors) provide beneﬁts

also for CCG supertagging (Lewis & Steedman, 2014), dialog state tracking (Henderson,

Thomson, & Young, 2013), pre-ordering for statistical machine translation (de Gispert,

Iglesias, & Byrne, 2015) and language modeling (Bengio, Ducharme, Vincent, & Janvin,

2003; Vaswani, Zhao, Fossum, & Chiang, 2013). Iyyer et al (2015) demonstrate that multi-

layer feed-forward networks can provide competitive results on sentiment classiﬁcation and

factoid question answering.

Networks with convolutional and pooling layers (Section 9) are useful for classiﬁcation

tasks in which we expect to ﬁnd strong local clues regarding class membership, but these

clues can appear in diﬀerent places in the input. For example, in a document classiﬁcation

task, a single key phrase (or an ngram) can help in determining the topic of the document

(Johnson & Zhang, 2015). We would like to learn that certain sequences of words are good

indicators of the topic, and do not necessarily care where they appear in the document.

Convolutional and pooling layers allow the model to learn to ﬁnd such local indicators,

regardless of their position. Convolutional and pooling architecture show promising results

on many tasks, including document classiﬁcation (Johnson & Zhang, 2015), short-text cat-

egorization (Wang, Xu, Xu, Liu, Zhang, Wang, & Hao, 2015a), sentiment classiﬁcation

(Kalchbrenner, Grefenstette, & Blunsom, 2014; Kim, 2014), relation type classiﬁcation be-

tween entities (Zeng, Liu, Lai, Zhou, & Zhao, 2014; dos Santos, Xiang, & Zhou, 2015), event

detection (Chen, Xu, Liu, Zeng, & Zhao, 2015; Nguyen & Grishman, 2015), paraphrase iden-

tiﬁcation (Yin & Sch¨utze, 2015) semantic role labeling (Collobert, Weston, Bottou, Karlen,

Kavukcuoglu, & Kuksa, 2011), question answering (Dong, Wei, Zhou, & Xu, 2015), predict-

ing box-oﬃce revenues of movies based on critic reviews (Bitvai & Cohn, 2015) modeling

text interestingness (Gao, Pantel, Gamon, He, & Deng, 2014), and modeling the relation

between character-sequences and part-of-speech tags (Santos & Zadrozny, 2014).

In natural language we often work with structured data of arbitrary sizes, such as

sequences and trees. We would like to be able to capture regularities in such structures,

or to model similarities between such structures. In many cases, this means encoding

the structure as a ﬁxed width vector, which we can then pass on to another statistical

learner for further processing. While convolutional and pooling architectures allow us to

encode arbitrary large items as ﬁxed size vectors capturing their most salient features,

they do so by sacriﬁcing most of the structural information. Recurrent (Section 10) and

recursive (Section 12) architectures, on the other hand, allow us to work with sequences

and trees while preserving a lot of the structural information. Recurrent networks (Elman,

1990) are designed to model sequences, while recursive networks (Goller & K¨uchler, 1996)

are generalizations of recurrent networks that can handle trees. We will also discuss an

extension of recurrent networks that allow them to model stacks (Dyer, Ballesteros, Ling,

Matthews, & Smith, 2015; Watanabe & Sumita, 2015).

Recurrent models have been shown to produce very strong results for language model-

ing, including (Mikolov, Karaﬁ´at, Burget, Cernocky, & Khudanpur, 2010; Mikolov, Kom-

brink, Luk´aˇs Burget,

Cernocky, & Khudanpur, 2011; Mikolov, 2012; Duh, Neubig, Sudoh,

& Tsukada, 2013; Adel, Vu, & Schultz, 2013; Auli, Galley, Quirk, & Zweig, 2013; Auli &

Gao, 2014); as well as for sequence tagging (Irsoy & Cardie, 2014; Xu, Auli, & Clark, 2015;

Ling, Dyer, Black, Trancoso, Fermandez, Amir, Marujo, & Luis, 2015b), machine transla-

tion (Sundermeyer, Alkhouli, Wuebker, & Ney, 2014; Tamura, Watanabe, & Sumita, 2014;

Sutskever, Vinyals, & Le, 2014; Cho, van Merrienboer, Gulcehre, Bahdanau, Bougares,

Schwenk, & Bengio, 2014b), dependency parsing (Dyer et al., 2015; Watanabe & Sumita,

2015), sentiment analysis (Wang, Liu, SUN, Wang, & Wang, 2015b), noisy text normal-

ization (Chrupala, 2014), dialog state tracking (Mrkˇsi´c,

O S´eaghdha, Thomson, Gasic, Su,

Vandyke, Wen, & Young, 2015), response generation (Sordoni, Galley, Auli, Brockett, Ji,

Mitchell, Nie, Gao, & Dolan, 2015), and modeling the relation between character sequences

and part-of-speech tags (Ling et al., 2015b).

Recursive models were shown to produce state-of-the-art or near state-of-the-art re-

sults for constituency (Socher, Bauer, Manning, & Andrew Y., 2013) and dependency (Le

& Zuidema, 2014; Zhu, Qiu, Chen, & Huang, 2015a) parse re-ranking, discourse parsing

(Li, Li, & Hovy, 2014), semantic relation classiﬁcation (Hashimoto, Miwa, Tsuruoka, &

Chikayama, 2013; Liu, Wei, Li, Ji, Zhou, & WANG, 2015), political ideology detection

based on parse trees (Iyyer, Enns, Boyd-Graber, & Resnik, 2014b), sentiment classiﬁcation

(Socher, Perelygin, Wu, Chuang, Manning, Ng, & Potts, 2013; Hermann & Blunsom, 2013),

target-dependent sentiment classiﬁcation (Dong, Wei, Tan, Tang, Zhou, & Xu, 2014) and

question answering (Iyyer, Boyd-Graber, Claudino, Socher, & Daum´e III, 2014a).

3. Feature Representation

Before discussing the network structure in more depth, it is important to pay attention

to how features are represented. For now, we can think of a feed-forward neural network

as a function NN(x) that takes as input a d

dimensional vector x and produces a d

out

dimensional output vector. The function is often used as a classiﬁer, assigning the input

x a degree of membership in one or more of d

out

classes. The function can be complex,

and is almost always non-linear. Common structures of this function will be discussed

in Section 4. Here, we focus on the input, x. When dealing with natural language, the

input x encodes features such as words, part-of-speech tags or other linguistic information.

Perhaps the biggest jump when moving from sparse-input linear models to neural-network

based models is to stop representing each feature as a unique dimension (the so called

one-hot representation) and representing them instead as dense vectors. That is, each core

feature is embedded into a d dimensional space, and represented as a vector in that space.

The embeddings (the vector representation of each core feature) can then be trained like

the other parameter of the function NN. Figure 1 shows the two approaches to feature

representation.

The feature embeddings (the values of the vector entries for each feature) are treated

as model parameters that need to be trained together with the other components of the

network. Methods of training (or obtaining) the feature embeddings will be discussed later.

For now, consider the feature embeddings as given.

The general structure for an NLP classiﬁcation system based on a feed-forward neural

network is thus:

1. Extract a set of core linguistic features f

, . . . , f

that are relevant for predicting the

output class.

2. For each feature f

of interest, retrieve the corresponding vector v(f

3. Combine the vectors (either by concatenation, summation or a combination of both)

into an input vector x.

4. Feed x into a non-linear classiﬁer (feed-forward neural network).

The biggest change in the input, then, is the move from sparse representations in which

each feature is its own dimension, to a dense representation in which each feature is mapped

to a vector. Another diﬀerence is that we extract only core features and not feature com-

binations. We will elaborate on both these changes brieﬂy.

Dense Vectors vs. One-hot Representations What are the beneﬁts of representing

our features as vectors instead of as unique IDs? Should we always represent features as

dense vectors? Let’s consider the two kinds of representations:

One Hot Each feature is its own dimension.

• Dimensionality of one-hot vector is same as number of distinct features.

1. Diﬀerent feature types may be embedded into diﬀerent spaces. For example, one may represent word

features using 100 dimensions, and part-of-speech features using 20 dimensions.

剩余75页未读，继续阅读

评论收藏

内容反馈

aachen_chen

2018-10-28

76页的论文电子版。与783k的版本相比，多了10.5/10.6两节，推荐这个。

xmokkk

粉丝: 0
资源: 3

A Primer on Neural Network Models for Natural Language Processin...

最新资源

A Primer on Neural Network Models for Natural Language Processin...

neural network methods for natural language processing

Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Processing

高清版Neural Network Methods in Natural Language Processing April 17, 2017

Neural Network Methods in Natural Language Processing

Neural Network Methods in Natural Language Processing epub

Neural Representations of Natural Language.pdf

Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Process

A Primer on Neural Network Models for NLP_部分11

A primer on wavelet and their scientific applications

A Primer on Scientfic Programming with Python.zip

A primer on memory consistency and cache coherence(带标签)

A Primer On Wavelets and Their Scientific Applications 第二版高清带目录（极致阅读体验，绝非扫描版）

Neural_Network_Methods_in_Natural_Language_Processing

Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Processing (part1/5)

Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Pr.pdf

NN methods for NLP Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Processing

A Primer on Data Association

A Primer on Scientific Programming with Python .pdf

A Primer on Memory Consistency and Cache Coherence

A Primer On Wavelets And Their Scientific Applications

最新资源