Cited by 21Topic ModelingSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningNatural Language Processing Techniques

Analysis of sentence embedding models using prediction tasks in natural language processing

Adi, Y., Kermany, E., Belinkov, Y., Lavi, O., Goldberg, Y.·2017·IBM Journal of Research and Development

Abstract

The tremendous success of word embeddings in improving the ability of computers to perform natural language tasks has shifted the research on language representation from word representation to focus on sentence representation. This shift introduced a plethora of methods for learning vector representations of sentences, many of them based on compositional methods over word embeddings. These vectors are used as features for subsequent machine learning tasks or for pretraining in the context of deep learning. However, not much is known about the properties that are encoded in these sentence representations and about the language information they encapsulate. Recent studies analyze the encoded representations and the kind of information they capture. In this paper, we analyze results from a previous study on the ability of models to encode basic properties such as content, order, and length. Our analysis led to new insights, such as the effect of word frequency or word distance on the ability to encode content and order.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1147/jrd.2017.2702858

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A separate approach uses probing classifiers to measure the extent to which internal states of the model encode information about physical properties.

    “A separate approach uses ‘probing classifiers’ [92,93] in order to measure the extent to which internal states of the model encode information about physical properties.”

    From Symbols and grounding in large language models (2023) · cites this paper as [92]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adi, Y., Kermany, E., Belinkov, Y., Lavi, O., & Goldberg, Y.
Venue
IBM Journal of Research and Development
Publisher
IBM
Published
2017-07-01
Volume
61
Issue
4/5
Pages
3:1-3:9
ISSN
0018-8646 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2752177116
Cited by
21
References
38
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IBM Journal of Research and Development (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • CONSENSUS project
  • European Commission within its FP7 Programme (611688, FP7-ICT-10-5.4)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
sentence embeddings, sentence representation, word embeddings, word frequency, word distance, prediction tasks, linguistic representation

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