Investigating the Effects of Word Substitution Errors on Sentence Embeddings
Open accessAbstract
A key initial step in several natural language processing (NLP) tasks involves embedding phrases of text to vectors of real numbers that preserve semantic meaning. To that end, several methods have been recently proposed with impressive results on semantic similarity tasks. However, all of these approaches assume that perfect transcripts are available when generating the embeddings. While this is a reasonable assumption for analysis of written text, it is limiting for analysis of transcribed text. In this paper we investigate the effects of word substitution errors, such as those coming from automatic speech recognition errors (ASR), on several state-of-the-art sentence embedding methods. To do this, we propose a new simulator that allows the experimenter to induce ASR-plausible word substitution errors in a corpus at a desired word error rate. We use this simulator to evaluate the robustness of several sentence embedding methods. Our results show that pre-trained neural sentence encoders are both robust to ASR errors and perform well on textual similarity tasks after errors are introduced. Meanwhile, unweighted averages of word vectors perform well with perfect transcriptions, but their performance degrades rapidly on textual similarity tasks for text with word substitution errors.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Deep neural network methods such as RNN/LSTM and transformer architectures use contextual information to generate embeddings for out-of-vocabulary words.
“Some methods based on deep neural networks (DNNs), such as recurrent neural network (RNN) / long-short term memory (LSTM) networks (e.g. ELMo [85]) or transformer architectures (e.g. BERT [86]) utilize contextual information to generate embeddings for OOV words.”
From A Review of Automated Speech and Language Features for Assessment of Cognitive and Thought Disorders (2020) · cites this paper as [85]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 17
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [17]Cer Daniel, Diab Mona, Agirre Eneko, Lopez-Gazpio Inigo, and Specia Lucia, “ SemEval-2017 Task 1: Semantic Textual Similarity Multilingual and Crosslingual Focused Evaluation,” 2017, pp. 1– 14, Association for Computational Linguistics.
- [21]Currie Hall Kathleen, Allen Blake, Fry Michael, Mackie Scott, and McAuliffe Michael, “ Phonological CorpusTools,” in 14th Conference for Laboratory Phonology, Tokyo, Japan, 2015.
- Authors
- Voleti, R., Liss, J. M., & Berisha, V.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Venue
- ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-05
- Volume
- 2019
- Pages
- 7315-7319
- ISSN
- 1520-6149 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7769116
- OpenAlex
- W2901265786
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 1.34
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC006859)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- sentence embeddings, speech recognition errors, transcription errors, error simulation, robustness, text similarity, word embeddings, word error rate
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review