The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
One sense per discourse
Open accessAbstract
It is well-known that there are polysemous words like sentence whose "meaning" or "sense" depends on the context of use. We have recently reported on two new word-sense disambiguation systems, one trained on bilingual material (the Canadian Hansards) and the other trained on monolingual material (Roget's Thesaurus and Grolier's Encyclopedia). As this work was nearing completion, we observed a very strong discourse effect. That is, if a polysemous word such as sentence appears two or more times in a well-written discourse, it is extremely likely that they will all share the same sense. This paper describes an experiment which confirmed this hypothesis and found that the tendency to share sense in the same discourse is extremely strong (98%). This result can be used as an additional source of constraint for improving the performance of the word-sense disambiguation algorithm. In addition, it could also be used to help evaluate disambiguation algorithms that did not make use of the discourse constraint.
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
Salton, G. (1988) · Cited by 1,587
Inference and disputed authorship : The Federalist
Mosteller, F. C., & Wallace, D. L. (1964) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 904
Bookstein, A. (1990) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/0306-4573(90)90016-u · Cited by 699
Word-sense disambiguation using statistical models of Roget's categories trained on large corpora
Yarowsky, D. (1992) · Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics - · doi:10.3115/992133.992140 · Cited by 663
Self-citationSemantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity
Hirst, G. (1987) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511554346 · Cited by 472
Word-sense disambiguation using statistical methods
Brown, P. F., Pietra, S. A. D., Pietra, V. J. D., & Mercer, R. L. (1991) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.3115/981344.981378 · Cited by 365
Cited by
The communicative function of ambiguity in language
Piantadosi, S. T., Tily, H., & Gibson, E. (2012) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.004 · Cited by 628
“Nearly all frequent words have multiple senses but word senses can be disambiguated reasonably well by computational models (Navigli, 2009), even using very simple knowledge of context or heuristics (Gale, Church, & Yarowsky, 1992; Yarowsky, 1993).”
Information retrieval and text mining technologies for chemistry
Krallinger, M., Rabal, O., Lourenço, A., Oyarzabal, J., & Valencia, A. (2017) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00851 · Cited by 281
Metadata
- Authors
- Gale, W. A., Church, K. W., & Yarowsky, D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the workshop on Speech and Natural Language - HLT '91
- Published
- 1992
- Pages
- 233
- OpenAlex
- W2159882563
- Cited by
- 522
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 4.45
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: One sense per discourse. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3115/1075527.1075579
- The paper
- Gale, W. A., Church, K. W., & Yarowsky, D. (1992). One sense per discourse. Proceedings of the workshop on Speech and Natural Language - HLT '91. https://doi.org/10.3115/1075527.1075579
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
