mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Unsupervised Semantic Variation Prediction using the Distribution of Sibling Embeddings

arXiv 2305.08654 ↗First posted 15 May 2023cs.CLcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Languages are dynamic entities, where the meanings associated with words constantly change with time. Detecting the semantic variation of words is an important task for various NLP applications that must make time-sensitive predictions. Existing work on semantic variation prediction have predominantly focused on comparing some form of an averaged contextualised representation of a target word computed from a given corpus. However, some of the previously associated meanings of a target word can become obsolete over time (e.g. meaning of gay as happy), while novel usages of existing words are observed (e.g. meaning of cell as a mobile phone). We argue that mean representations alone cannot accurately capture such semantic variations and propose a method that uses the entire cohort of the contextualised embeddings of the target word, which we refer to as the sibling distribution. Experimental results on SemEval-2020 Task 1 benchmark dataset for semantic variation prediction show that our method outperforms prior work that consider only the mean embeddings, and is comparable to the current state-of-the-art. Moreover, a qualitative analysis shows that our method detects important semantic changes in words that are not captured by the existing methods. Source code is available at https://github.com/a1da4/svp-gauss .

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 May 2023.

Builds on

25 of 52 references.

References · 25

  1. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
  2. 2019How Contextual are Contextualized Word Representations? Comparing the Geometry of BERT, ELMo, and GPT-2 Embeddingscited by 784
  3. 2021Mind the Gap: Assessing Temporal Generalization in Neural Language Modelscited by 230
  4. 2016Diachronic Word Embeddings Reveal Statistical Laws of Semantic Changecited by 221
  5. 2020Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structurecited by 207
  6. 2022TimeLMs: Diachronic Language Models from Twittercited by 131
  7. 2020SemEval-2020 Task 1: Unsupervised Lexical Semantic Change Detectioncited by 108
  8. 2014Word Representations via Gaussian Embeddingcited by 96
  9. 2019Evaluating the Underlying Gender Bias in Contextualized Word Embeddingscited by 94
  10. 2018Diachronic word embeddings and semantic shifts: a surveycited by 92
  11. 2020Analysing Lexical Semantic Change with Contextualised Word Representationscited by 92
  12. 2014Statistically Significant Detection of Linguistic Changecited by 82
13 more
  1. 2018Survey of Computational Approaches to Lexical Semantic Changecited by 62
  2. 2014Temporal Analysis of Language through Neural Language Modelscited by 54
  3. 2022Problems with Cosine as a Measure of Embedding Similarity for High Frequency Wordscited by 49
  4. 2021Time Masking for Temporal Language Modelscited by 46
  5. 2017Dynamic Word Embeddings for Evolving Semantic Discoverycited by 38
  6. 2019Leveraging Contextual Embeddings for Detecting Diachronic Semantic Shiftcited by 37
  7. 2021Explaining and Improving BERT Performance on Lexical Semantic Change Detectioncited by 34
  8. 2019Time-Out: Temporal Referencing for Robust Modeling of Lexical Semantic Changecited by 33
  9. 2020UiO-UvA at SemEval-2020 Task 1: Contextualised Embeddings for Lexical Semantic Change Detectioncited by 32
  10. 2022Temporal Attention for Language Modelscited by 21
  11. 2022Contextualized language models for semantic change detection: lessons learnedcited by 20
  12. 2022Improving Temporal Generalization of Pre-trained Language Models with Lexical Semantic Changecited by 18
  13. 2021Learning Sense-Specific Static Embeddings using Contextualised Word Embeddings as a Proxycited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 2.

8 papers.