15

Gazetteer or any other option of intentionally fixed size feature seems a very popular approach in academic papers, when you have a problem of finite size, for example NER in a fixed corpora, or POS tagging or anything else. I would not consider it cheating unless the only feature you will be using is Gazetteer matching. However, when you train any kind of ...


6

Jurafsky and Martin's NLP textbook has a chapter about information extraction that should be a good starting point. For example, if you want to extract company names it will tell you how to do that. A paralegal would go through the entire document and highlight important points from the document. What you need to do depends heavily on what your ...


6

SOTA is changing so rapidly in NLP that even Data Science professionists struggle to cope with it. I have two main sources that I constantly check to gain some insights on SOTA: NLP Progress from Sebastian Ruder. It contains updates on NLP on a whole lot of subfields, NER and POST included. Paper with code contains a section on NLP. That's a great website ...


5

After having used MITIE for a few weeks, I feel like I at least have enough to answer my basic questions: (and 3.) All models need to be trained from scratch - there is no online method to add new samples to the model as they come in. This is unfortunate because MITIE takes at least 45 minutes to an hour to train on a ~20k-sized dataset. The datasets I used ...


4

Using a list of entities has few disadvantages: The list is closed The list is not context sensitive. You need context in order to differ between "a white house" and "the white house". List building require a lot of labor List might also contain errors. It does feel like cheating (or at list no NLP insights are used). You can cope with these disadvantages ...


4

You ideally want to use Reinforcement Learning in situations where there is delayed feedback and stochastic transitions in the environment. Although you could potentially apply RL, in your case, you might be better off with a Sequence to Sequence learning framework (https://papers.nips.cc/paper/5346-sequence-to-sequence-learning-with-neural-networks.pdf) ...


4

Assuming your financial documents have a consistent structure and format and despite the algorithm kind of becoming "unfashionable" as of late due to the prevalence of deep learning, I would suggest that you try using Conditional Random Fields (CRF). CRFs offer very competative performance in this space and are often used for named entity recognition, part ...


4

Yes, there is a french model free and ready to use via the spaCy package! Here are the small amd medium sized models, that should be ready to go. Here is the basic summary of the dataset, shown at the spaCy website:


3

Tag mapping according to nltk source 'CC': 'Coordinating conjunction', 'PRP$': 'Possessive pronoun', 'CD': 'Cardinal number', 'RB': 'Adverb', 'DT': 'Determiner', 'RBR': 'Adverb, comparative', 'EX': 'Existential there', 'RBS': 'Adverb, superlative', 'FW': 'Foreign word', 'RP': '...


3

The features for a token in a NER algorithm are usually binary. i.e The feature exists or it does not. For example, a token (say the word 'hello'), is all lower case. Therefore, that is a feature for that word. You could name the feature 'IS_ALL_LOWERCASE'. Now, for POS tags, lets take the word 'make'. It is a verb and hence the feature "IS_VERB" is a ...


2

The task you are asking about is Named entity recognition A good way to identify a word category is by using patterns for the context of the word. In your case you can use patterns like: "I took X" for a medicine name "I had pain in my X" for a body part "I suffered from X" for a disease The easiest and fastest way is to discuss the pattern with a ...


2

Yes it is a challenging task to extract named entities in tweets. Give a go at NLTK NER and also Alan Ritter's Twitter specific NER and evaluate on their performance and compare to Stanford NER and which one fits in your use. Maybe you want to use more than one to get more named entities if you don't mind so much of false NEs..


2

Yes, it might not be exactly natural Language Understanding but CRF is an excellent algorithm to train Named Entity Recognition tasks and is the stamdard model used by Stanford NLP group. You can try out their NER tagger here. If you want something that accounts for language understanding then there are certain papers who have trained recurrent neural ...


2

check this article: https://paperswithcode.com/paper/a-new-concept-of-deep-reinforcement-learning-1 with name "A New Concept of Deep Reinforcement Learning based Augmented General Tagging System"


2

Simply put, Named Entity Recognition (NER) is a multi-class structured prediction (classification) problem, so you have a sequence of words and you want to label each one most of the time with these labels ( start-of-a-person-name, continue-of-a-person-name, start-of-an-org-name, continue-of-an-org-name, start-of-a-location-name, continue-of-a-location-name, ...


2

You can create your own named-entity recognition through a pre-trained model like Spacy. https://spacy.io/usage/linguistic-features#section-named-entities these keywords in your example should be considered as an age entity above 21 years 65 years or less try to play its linguistic features to get what you need. Hope this helps.


2

@imoutidi, I also encountered the same deprecation warning. After digging around a bit, it looks like the new/replacement package can be imported with the following: from nltk.tag.stanford import CoreNLPNERTagger However, when trying to run the tag() method I end up getting an unexpected HTTP connection refused error. I haven't figured out if this is an ...


2

BIO(L) tagging is important (but as you correctly noted, not necessary) part of a NER pipeline. Main idea behind such split is to facilitate learning in following manner. Take English as an example, some words will (most likely) never end a Named Entity, like adjectives, so the model will never tag them as the L(ast) part of a named entity. The same applies ...


2

The difference is not related to the length of the named entities. Rather, it deals with how two adjacent named entities of the same type are labeled. In IOB1 (IOB), B- is only used to separate two adjacent entities of the same type: Today O Alice I-PER Bob B-PER and O I O # or I-PER if pronominals are being tagged ate O ...


2

I suggest you use word2vec for that task. Word2vec is an unsupervised algorithm that calculates N-dimension embeddings for the words in the corpus used for learning. Basically, it gives you a numerical representation in the form of an n-dimension array for each of the words you use in your inputs. Once the model is built and the emeddings are available, to ...


2

But what about new entities (movie or production company name) that trained system hasn't seen how can we tag them. Re-training the model every time with new released movies won't be feasible. A NER model should not have to be retrained to tag a new text it has not seen before. If trained successfully it will use information it learned from the labeled ...


2

It is easy. You need to tag a phrase using B (Begin), I (Interior), and E (End). For example, you want to tag "United States of America" as the name of a country. You will tag likes: United(B_Country) States(I_Country) of(I_Country) America(E_Country) In the same text if you find "Islamic Republic of Iran", you will tag likes: Islamic(B_Country) Republic(...


2

As far as I know you don't have a lot of options, you're probably stuck with heuristics: Capital letters Regular expressions (e.g. for dates) List of predefined entities (e.g. from Wikipedia) stored in a dictionary


2

There is a quite detailed comparison with references here: https://towardsdatascience.com/a-tale-of-two-macro-f1s-8811ddcf8f04 Basically the two definitions are used and both can be considered valid. For the sake of clarity I would recommend mentioning which definition you are using when you report your results.


1

It depends on the signal-to-noise in the dataset. The amount of data to perform named entity disambiguation will depend on the tf-idf score of the occupation and skills, rare occupations and skills will require less data to build a performant model. For example, that the sentence "I am a cook that multitasks well." "Cook" is an occupation and "multitask" is ...


1

The most advanced (and complicated) approach to this is some sort of weakly-supervised system like Holoclean. It seems promising, but not easy. The other end of the spectrum are heuristics like the one you propose. If you want to use a string distance approach like you describe, I would create some metric that gives points for both string edit distance and ...


1

Shannon entropy is a common measure of uncertainty among a fixed set of choices, as are the ones provided by Brian Spiering. Regarding your question -- "some approach to compare named entities regarding how difficult to disambiguate?" -- note that the difficulty to disambiguate an entity is completely context and domain dependent. To give a truly useful ...


1

Entity Linking is a type of supervised machine learning, thus many of the common performance metrics could be used. In particular, creating a confusion matrix would identify where one label was predicted but the ground-truth was different. Confusion matrices can be calculated with counts or normalized, a normalized data would be an estimate of "ambiguity ...


1

To extend on the answer of @Kevin S Lin. POS tagging or Part-of Speech tagging refers to: the process of marking up a word in a text (corpus) as corresponding to a particular part of speech, based on both its definition and its context—i.e., its relationship with adjacent and related words in a phrase, sentence, or paragraph. A simplified form of this is ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible