Cited by 3Linguistics and language evolutionNatural Language Processing TechniquesTopic Modeling

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Semisupervised Neural Proto-Language Reconstruction

Open access
Lu, Liang, Xie, Peirong, Mortensen, David·2024·Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Abstract

Existing work implementing comparative reconstruction of ancestral languages (protolanguages) has usually required full supervision.However, historical reconstruction models are only of practical value if they can be trained with a limited amount of labeled data.We propose a semisupervised historical reconstruction task in which the model is trained on only a small amount of labeled data (cognate sets with proto-forms) and a large amount of unlabeled data (cognate sets without proto-forms).We propose a neural architecture for comparative reconstruction (DPD-BiReconstructor) incorporating an essential insight from linguists' comparative method: that reconstructed words should not only be reconstructable from their daughter words, but also deterministically transformable back into their daughter words.We show that this architecture is able to leverage unlabeled cognate sets to outperform strong semisupervised baselines on this novel task 1 .Vladimir I. Levenshtein.1966.Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals.In Soviet Physics Doklady, volume 10, pages 707-710.Soviet Union.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.788

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Lu, L., Xie, P., & Mortensen, D.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
Published
2024
Pages
14715-14759
ISSN
0736-587X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402671328
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2
FWCI
11.05
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Carnegie Mellon University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and language evolution
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
historical linguistics, comparative reconstruction, semi-supervised learning, cognate sets, ancestral languages, unlabeled data, comparative analysis

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