An Investigation of the Interactions Between Pre-Trained Word Embeddings, Character Models and POS Tags in Dependency Parsing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We provide a comprehensive analysis of the interactions between pre-trained word embeddings, character models and POS tags in a transition-based dependency parser. While previous studies have shown POS information to be less important in the presence of character models, we show that in fact there are complex interactions between all three techniques. In isolation each produces large improvements over a baseline system using randomly initialised word embeddings only, but combining them quickly leads to diminishing returns. We categorise words by frequency, POS tag and language in order to systematically investigate how each of the techniques affects parsing quality. For many word categories, applying any two of the three techniques is almost as good as the full combined system. Character models tend to be more important for low-frequency open-class words, especially in morphologically rich languages, while POS tags can help disambiguate high-frequency function words. We also show that large character embedding sizes help even for languages with small character sets, especially in morphologically rich languages.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Aug 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 4; 2022: 4; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.
10 papers.
- 2022Does Your Model Classify Entities Reasonably? Diagnosing and Mitigating Spurious Correlations in Entity Typingcited by 16
- 2021A Modest Pareto Optimisation Analysis of Dependency Parsers in 2021cited by 9
- 2021A Falta de Pan, Buenas Son Tortas: The Efficacy of Predicted UPOS Tags for Low Resource UD Parsingcited by 5
- 2021Instance-Based Neural Dependency Parsingcited by 3
- 2021What Taggers Fail to Learn, Parsers Need the Mostcited by 2
- 2022Sort by Structure: Language Model Ranking as Dependency Probingcited by 2
- 2022Parsing linearizations appreciate PoS tags - but some are fussy about errorscited by 1
- 2025Tokenization Strategies for Low-Resource Agglutinative Languages in Word2Vec: Case Study on Turkish and Finnishcited by 1
- 2022The Fragility of Multi-Treebank Parsing Evaluationcited by 0
- 2023Another Dead End for Morphological Tags? Perturbed Inputs and Parsingcited by 0
- 2025Tokenization Strategies for Low-Resource Agglutinative Languages in Word2Vec: Case Study on Turkish and Finnish27 Aug 2025
- 2023Another Dead End for Morphological Tags? Perturbed Inputs and Parsing24 May 2023
- 2022Parsing linearizations appreciate PoS tags - but some are fussy about errors27 Oct 2022
- 2022The Fragility of Multi-Treebank Parsing Evaluation14 Sep 2022
- 2022Sort by Structure: Language Model Ranking as Dependency Probing10 Jun 2022
- 2022Does Your Model Classify Entities Reasonably? Diagnosing and Mitigating Spurious Correlations in Entity Typing25 May 2022
- 2021Instance-Based Neural Dependency Parsing28 Sep 2021
- 2021A Falta de Pan, Buenas Son Tortas: The Efficacy of Predicted UPOS Tags for Low Resource UD Parsing8 Jun 2021
- 2021A Modest Pareto Optimisation Analysis of Dependency Parsers in 20218 Jun 2021
- 2021What Taggers Fail to Learn, Parsers Need the Most2 Apr 2021