mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Neural Semantic Parsing with Extremely Rich Symbolic Meaning Representations

arXiv 2404.12698 ↗First posted 19 Apr 2024cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Current open-domain neural semantics parsers show impressive performance. However, closer inspection of the symbolic meaning representations they produce reveals significant weaknesses: sometimes they tend to merely copy character sequences from the source text to form symbolic concepts, defaulting to the most frequent word sense based in the training distribution. By leveraging the hierarchical structure of a lexical ontology, we introduce a novel compositional symbolic representation for concepts based on their position in the taxonomical hierarchy. This representation provides richer semantic information and enhances interpretability. We introduce a neural "taxonomical" semantic parser to utilize this new representation system of predicates, and compare it with a standard neural semantic parser trained on the traditional meaning representation format, employing a novel challenge set and evaluation metric for evaluation. Our experimental findings demonstrate that the taxonomical model, trained on much richer and complex meaning representations, is slightly subordinate in performance to the traditional model using the standard metrics for evaluation, but outperforms it when dealing with out-of-vocabulary concepts. This finding is encouraging for research in computational semantics that aims to combine data-driven distributional meanings with knowledge-based symbolic representations.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 92 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Apr 2024.

Builds on

32 of 92 references.

References · 32

  1. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  2. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  3. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
  4. 2020mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformercited by 1,813
  5. 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,445
  6. 2016ConceptNet 5.5: An Open Multilingual Graph of General Knowledgecited by 1,065
  7. 2020Multilingual Denoising Pre-training for Neural Machine Translationcited by 1,028
  8. 2020Language-agnostic BERT Sentence Embeddingcited by 621
  9. 2021ByT5: Towards a token-free future with pre-trained byte-to-byte modelscited by 504
  10. 2020COGS: A Compositional Generalization Challenge Based on Semantic Interpretationcited by 260
  11. 2019Making Better Mistakes: Leveraging Class Hierarchies with Deep Networkscited by 112
  12. 2022Graph Pre-training for AMR Parsing and Generationcited by 55
20 more
  1. 2017The Parallel Meaning Bank: Towards a Multilingual Corpus of Translations Annotated with Compositional Meaning Representationscited by 41
  2. 2016An Incremental Parser for Abstract Meaning Representationcited by 34
  3. 2021Maximum Bayes Smatch Ensemble Distillation for AMR Parsingcited by 27
  4. 2019Core Semantic First: A Top-down Approach for AMR Parsingcited by 24
  5. 2023SLOG: A Structural Generalization Benchmark for Semantic Parsingcited by 22
  6. 2020AMR Similarity Metrics from Principlescited by 21
  7. 2015AutoExtend: Extending Word Embeddings to Embeddings for Synsets and Lexemescited by 19
  8. 2023SMATCH++: Standardized and Extended Evaluation of Semantic Graphscited by 19
  9. 2017Neural Semantic Parsing by Character-based Translation: Experiments with Abstract Meaning Representationscited by 18
  10. 2018Exploring Neural Methods for Parsing Discourse Representation Structurescited by 14
  11. 2023Are Character-level Translations Worth the Wait? Comparing ByT5 and mT5 for Machine Translationcited by 14
  12. 2020'UFAL at MRP 2020: Permutation-invariant Semantic Parsing in PERINcited by 12
  13. 2016RIGA at SemEval-2016 Task 8: Impact of Smatch Extensions and Character-Level Neural Translation on AMR Parsing Accuracycited by 11
  14. 2018Evaluating Scoped Meaning Representationscited by 10
  15. 2023Pre-Trained Language-Meaning Models for Multilingual Parsing and Generationcited by 9
  16. 2023AMR Parsing is Far from Solved: GrAPES, the Granular AMR Parsing Evaluation Suitecited by 6
  17. 2024PMB5: Gaining More Insight into Neural Semantic Parsing with Challenging Benchmarkscited by 5
  18. 2015Compressing Word Embeddingscited by 3
  19. 2021Encoding Hierarchical Information in Neural Networks helps in Subpopulation Shiftcited by 3
  20. 2020DRS at MRP 2020: Dressing up Discourse Representation Structures as Graphscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

5 papers.