The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Encoding Sentences with Graph Convolutional Networks for Semantic Role Labeling
Open accessAbstract
Semantic role labeling (SRL) is the task of identifying the predicate-argument structure of a sentence.It is typically regarded as an important step in the standard NLP pipeline.As the semantic representations are closely related to syntactic ones, we exploit syntactic information in our model.We propose a version of graph convolutional networks (GCNs), a recent class of neural networks operating on graphs, suited to model syntactic dependency graphs.GCNs over syntactic dependency trees are used as sentence encoders, producing latent feature representations of words in a sentence.We observe that GCN layers are complementary to LSTM ones: when we stack both GCN and LSTM layers, we obtain a substantial improvement over an already state-of-theart LSTM SRL model, resulting in the best reported scores on the standard benchmark (CoNLL-2009) both for Chinese and English.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Hochreiter, S., & Schmidhuber, J. (1997) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 · Cited by 102,318
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition
Lecun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., & Haffner, P. (1998) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/5.726791 · Cited by 58,805
Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder–Decoder for Statistical Machine Translation
Cho, K., van Merrienboer, B., Gulcehre, C., Bahdanau, D., Bougares, F., Schwenk, H., & Bengio, Y. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1179 · Cited by 25,545
Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks
Kipf, T. N., & Welling, M. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1609.02907 · Cited by 24,853
Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks
Sutskever, I., Vinyals, O., & Le, Q. V. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1409.3215 · Cited by 17,766
Elman, J. L. (1990) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1402_1 · Cited by 11,212
Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank
Marcus, M. (1993) · doi:10.21236/ada273556 · Cited by 7,405
Recursive Deep Models for Semantic Compositionality Over a Sentiment Treebank
Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J., Chuang, J., Manning, C. D., Ng, A., & Potts, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d13-1170 · Cited by 6,878
Neural Message Passing for Quantum ChemistryPreprint
Gilmer, J., Schoenholz, S. S., Riley, P. F., Vinyals, O., & Dahl, G. E. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1704.01212 · Cited by 5,678
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Richard Johansson and Pierre Nugues. 2008. The ef- fect of syntactic representation on semantic role la- beling. In Proceedings of COLING.
- Beth Levin. 1993. English verb classes and alterna- tions: A preliminary investigation. University of Chicago press.
- Diego Marcheggiani, Anton Frolov, and Ivan Titov. 2017. A simple and accurate syntax-agnostic neural model for dependency-based semantic role labeling. In Proceedings of CoNLL.
- Michael Roth and Mirella Lapata. 2016. Neural se- mantic role labeling with dependency path embed- dings. In Proceedings of ACL.
- Rico Sennrich and Barry Haddow. 2016. Linguistic in- put features improve neural machine translation. In Proceedings of WMT.
- Ivan Titov, James Henderson, Paola Merlo, and Gabriele Musillo. 2009. Online projectivisation for synchronous parsing of semantic and syntactic de- pendencies. In Proceedings of IJCAI.
- Hai Zhao, Wenliang Chen, Jun'ichi Kazama, Kiyotaka Uchimoto, and Kentaro Torisawa. 2009. Multilin- gual dependency learning: Exploiting rich features for tagging syntactic and semantic dependencies. In Proceedings of CoNLL.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–906 of 906
R$\mathbf{^{2}}$GCN: Rich Relational Knowledge Graph Representation Learning
Yu, S., Wang, Y., Zhang, J. S., Chen, J., Song, Y., & Xia, F. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Big Data · doi:10.1109/tbdata.2026.3689003
MultiRel:Extracting multiple relation triplets by graph attention network
Jia, Z., Duan, C., Jiang, J., & Ru, J. (2026) · Soft Computing · doi:10.1007/s00500-025-10707-8
Ma, J., Liu, N., Zhang, Z., Wu, W., Liu, G., & Aodengbala, A. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-981-92-3447-9_26
A comprehensive survey of semantic role labeling in the era of pretrained language models
Chen, H., Zhang, M., Li, J., Øvrelid, L., Hajič, J., Fei, H., & Zhang, M. (2026) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-026-11623-5 · Cited by 15
Decoupled Graph Attention Networks
Naveencharan, R., Nair, H. K., Meenakshisundar, K., & Reena Monica, P. (2026) · ACM SIGMOD Joint International Workshop on Graph Data Management Experiences & Systems (GRADES) and Network Data Analytics (NDA) (GRADES-NDA) · doi:10.1145/3810460.3812782
Leveraging gated architectures for enhanced long-range dependency learning in non-attributed graphs
Lee, J., Lee, D., An, C., & Park, E. K. (2026) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2026.116985
Metadata
- Authors
- Marcheggiani, D., & Titov, I.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Marcheggiani, Diego
- ORCID
- Titov, Ivan
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
- Published
- 2017
- Pages
- 1506-1515
- OpenAlex
- W2600702321
- Cited by
- 907
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 130 · 2021: 211 · 2020: 176 · 2019: 130 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 45.78
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Amazon Web Services
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (639.022.518)
- H2020 European Research Council (678254)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Keywords
- semantic role labeling, graph convolutional networks, syntactic dependency trees, sentence encoding, predicate-argument structure, LSTM, Chinese language processing, English language processing
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
