Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multi-perspective contrastive learning framework guided by sememe knowledge and label information for sarcasm detection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sarcasm is a prevailing rhetorical device that intentionally uses words that literally meaning opposite the real meaning. Due to this deliberate ambiguity, accurately detecting sarcasm can encourage the comprehension of users’ real intentions. Therefore, sarcasm detection is a critical and challenging task for sentiment analysis. In previous research, neural network-based models are generally unsatisfactory when dealing with complex sarcastic expressions. To ameliorate this situation, we propose a multi-perspective contrastive learning framework for sarcasm detection, called SLGC, which is guided by sememe knowledge and label information based on the pre-trained neural model. For the in-instance perspective, we leverage the sememe, the minimum meaning unit, to guide the contrastive learning to produce high-quality sentence representations. For the between-instance perspective, we utilize label information to guide contrastive learning to mine potential interaction relationships between sarcastic expressions. Experiments on two public benchmark sarcasm detection dataset demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The partition version of the GuanSarcasm dataset generated during the current study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Notes

  1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/.

  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sememe.

  3. https://github.com/thunlp/OpenHowNet.

  4. https://www.guancha.cn/.

  5. https://nlds.soe.ucsc.edu/sarcasm2.

References

  1. Attardo S (2000) Irony as relevant inappropriateness[J]. J Pragmatics 32(6):793–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gibbs RW (2000) Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor Symbol 15(1–2):5–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gibbs RW (1986) On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. J Exp Psychol Gen 115(1):3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Joshi A, Sharma V, Bhattacharyya P (2015) Harnessing context incongruity for sarcasm detection. In: Proceedings of the 53rd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 7th international joint conference on natural language processing (volume 2: short papers), pp 757–762. Association for Computational Linguistics, Beijing, China. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/P15-2124. https://aclanthology.org/P15-2124

  5. Chen I-H, Long Y, Lu Q, Huang C-R (2017) Leveraging eventive information for better metaphor detection and classification. In: Proceedings of the 21st conference on computational natural language learning (CoNLL 2017), pp 36–46

  6. Jiang X, Zhao Q, Long Y, Wang Z (2022) Chinese synesthesia detection: new dataset and models. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022. Association for Computational Linguistics, Dublin, Ireland, pp 3877–3887

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Carvalho P, Sarmento L, Silva MJ, De Oliveira E (2009) Clues for detecting irony in user-generated contents: oh...!! it’s" so easy";-. In: Proceedings of the 1st international CIKM workshop on topic-sentiment analysis for mass opinion, pp 53–56

  8. Forslid E, Wikén N (2015) Automatic irony- and sarcasm detection in Social media

  9. Liang B et al (2023) Embedding Refinement Framework for Targeted Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 14(1):279–293. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAFFC.2021.3071388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Liang B, Li X, Gui L, Yonghao F, He Y, Yang M, Ruifeng X (2023) Few-shot Aspect Category Sentiment Analysis via Meta-learning. ACM Trans Inf Syst 41(1):31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3529954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mozafari M, Farahbakhsh R, Crespi N (2019) A BERT-based transfer learning approach for hate speech detection in online social media. In: International conference on complex networks and their applications. Springer, pp 928–940

  12. Ghosh D, Shrivastava R, Muresan S (2021) “laughing at you or with you”: The role of sarcasm in shaping the disagreement space. In: Proceedings of the 16th conference of the European chapter of the association for computational linguistics: main volume, pp 1998–2010. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.171. https://aclanthology.org/2021.eacl-main.171

  13. Maynard D, Greenwood M (2014) Who cares about sarcastic tweets? Investigating the impact of sarcasm on sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’14), pp 4238–4243. European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Reykjavik, Iceland. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/67_Paper.pdf

  14. Bharti SK, Babu KS, Jena SK (2015) Parsing-based sarcasm sentiment recognition in twitter data. In: Pei J, Silvestri F, Tang J (eds) Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining, ASONAM 2015, Paris, France, August 25–28, 2015, pp 1373–1380. ACM, ???. https://doi.org/10.1145/2808797.2808910. https://doi.org/10.1145/2808797.2808910

  15. González-Ibáñez R, Muresan S, Wacholder N (2011) Identifying sarcasm in Twitter: a closer look. In: Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, pp 581–586. Association for Computational Linguistics, Portland. https://aclanthology.org/P11-2102

  16. Reyes A, Rosso P, Veale T (2013) A multidimensional approach for detecting irony in twitter. Lang Resour Eval 47(1):239–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liebrecht C, Kunneman F, van den Bosch A (2013) The perfect solution for detecting sarcasm in tweets #not. In: Proceedings of the 4th workshop on computational approaches to subjectivity, sentiment and social media analysis, pp 29–37. Association for Computational Linguistics, Atlanta. https://aclanthology.org/W13-1605

  18. Joshi A, Bhattacharyya P, Carman MJ (2017) Automatic sarcasm detection: a survey. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 50(5):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Amir S, Wallace BC, Lyu H, Carvalho P, Silva MJ (2016) Modelling context with user embeddings for sarcasm detection in social media. In: Proceedings of the 20th SIGNLL conference on computational natural language learning, pp 167–177. Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/K16-1017. https://aclanthology.org/K16-1017

  20. Zhang S, Zhang X, Chan J, Rosso P (2019) Irony detection via sentiment-based transfer learning. Inf Process Manag 56(5):1633–1644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Babanejad N, Davoudi H, An A, Papagelis M (2020) Affective and contextual embedding for sarcasm detection. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on computational linguistics, pp 225–243. International Committee on Computational Linguistics, Barcelona (Online). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.20. https://aclanthology.org/2020.coling-main.20

  22. Kumar A, Narapareddy VT, Gupta P, Srikanth VA, Neti LBM, Malapati A (2021) Adversarial and auxiliary features-aware BERT for sarcasm detection. In: 8th ACM IKDD CODS and 26th COMAD, pp 163–170

  23. Gao J, He D, Tan X, Qin T, Wang L, Liu T (2019) Representation degeneration problem in training natural language generation models. In: 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019. OpenReview.net, ???. https://openreview.net/forum?id=SkEYojRqtm

  24. Li B, Zhou H, He J, Wang M, Yang Y, Li L (2020) On the sentence embeddings from pre-trained language models. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 9119–9130. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.733. https://aclanthology.org/2020.emnlp-main.733

  25. Chen T, Kornblith S, Norouzi M, Hinton GE A (2020) simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In: Proceedings of the 37th international conference on machine learning, ICML 2020, 13–18 July 2020, Virtual Event. Proceedings of machine learning research, vol 119, pp 1597–1607. PMLR, Vienna. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/chen20j.html

  26. Hadsell R, Chopra S, LeCun Y (2006) Dimensionality reduction by learning an invariant mapping. In: 2006 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR’06), vol 2, pp 1735–1742. IEEE

  27. Wang T, Isola P (2020) Understanding contrastive representation learning through alignment and uniformity on the hypersphere. In: Proceedings of the 37th international conference on machine learning, ICML 2020, 13–18 July 2020, Virtual Event. Proceedings of machine learning research, vol 119, pp 9929–9939. PMLR, Vienna. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/wang20k.html

  28. Tian Y, Sun C, Poole B, Krishnan D, Schmid C, Isola P (2020) What makes for good views for contrastive learning? In: Larochelle H, Ranzato M, Hadsell R, Balcan M, Lin H (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 33: annual conference on neural information processing systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6–12, 2020, Virtual. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/hash/4c2e5eaae9152079b9e95845750bb9ab-Abstract.html

  29. O’Grady W, Dobrovolsky M, Katamba F (1997) Contemporary linguistics. St. Martin’s, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bloomfield L (1926) A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2(3):153–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Goddard C, Wierzbicka A (1994) Semantic and lexical universals: theory and empirical findings

  32. Dong Z, Dong Q (2003) Hownet—a hybrid language and knowledge resource. In: International conference on natural language processing and knowledge engineering, 2003. Proceedings. 2003, pp 820–824. IEEE

  33. Qi F, Yang C, Liu Z, Dong Q, Sun M, Dong Z (2019) Openhownet: an open sememe-based lexical knowledge base. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1901.09957

  34. Ghosh A, Veale T (2017) Magnets for sarcasm: making sarcasm detection timely, contextual and very personal. In: Proceedings of the 2017 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, pp 482–491. Association for Computational Linguistics, Copenhagen. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D17-1050. https://aclanthology.org/D17-1050

  35. Tay Y, Luu AT, Hui SC, Su J (2018) Reasoning with sarcasm by reading in-between. In: Proceedings of the 56th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (volume 1: long papers), pp 1010–1020. Association for Computational Linguistics, Melbourne. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P18-1093. https://aclanthology.org/P18-1093

  36. Xiong T, Zhang P, Zhu H, Yang Y (2019) Sarcasm detection with self-matching networks and low-rank bilinear pooling. In: Liu L, White RW, Mantrach A, Silvestri F, McAuley JJ, Baeza-Yates R, Zia L (eds) The world wide web conference, WWW 2019, San Francisco, CA, USA, May 13–17, 2019, pp 2115–2124. ACM, San Francisco. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313735. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313735

  37. Onan A, Toçoğlu MA (2021) A term weighted neural language model and stacked bidirectional LSTM based framework for sarcasm identification. IEEE Access 9:7701–7722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Oprea S, Magdy W (2020) iSarcasm: a dataset of intended sarcasm. In: Proceedings of the 58th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, pp 1279–1289. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.118. https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.118

  39. Rockwell P, Theriot EM (2001) Culture, gender, and gender mix in encoders of sarcasm: a self-assessment analysis. Commun Res Rep 18(1):44–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Shmueli B, Ku L-W, Ray S (2020) Reactive supervision: a new method for collecting sarcasm data. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 2553–2559. Association for computational linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.201. https://aclanthology.org/2020.emnlp-main.201

  41. Plepi J, Flek L (2021) Perceived and intended sarcasm detection with graph attention networks. In: Findings of the association for computational linguistics: EMNLP 2021, pp 4746–4753. Association for Computational Linguistics, Punta Cana. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.408. https://aclanthology.org/2021.findings-emnlp.408

  42. Rui W, Qianlong W, Bin L, Yi C, Zhiyuan W, Bing Q, Ruifeng X (2022) Masking and Generation: an Unsupervised Method for Sarcasm Detection. In: Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2172–2177. https://doi.org/10.1145/3477495.3531825

  43. Jaiswal A, Babu AR, Zadeh MZ, Banerjee D, Makedon F (2021) A survey on contrastive self-supervised learning. Technologies 9(1):2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Oord Avd, Li Y, Vinyals O (2018) Representation learning with contrastive predictive coding. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1807.03748

  45. Gutmann M, Hyvärinen A (2010) Noise-contrastive estimation: a new estimation principle for unnormalized statistical models. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth international conference on artificial intelligence and statistics, pp 297–304. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings

  46. Gao T, Yao X, Chen D (2021) SimCSE: simple contrastive learning of sentence embeddings. In: Proceedings of the 2021 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, pp 6894–6910. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online and Punta Cana. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.552. https://aclanthology.org/2021.emnlp-main.552

  47. Yan Y, Li R, Wang S, Zhang F, Wu W, Xu W (2021) ConSERT: a contrastive framework for self-supervised sentence representation transfer. In: Proceedings of the 59th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 11th international joint conference on natural language processing (volume 1: long papers), pp 5065–5075. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.393. https://aclanthology.org/2021.acl-long.393

  48. Hinton GE, Srivastava N, Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Salakhutdinov RR (2012) Improving neural networks by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.0580

  49. Rozsa A, Rudd EM, Boult TE (2016) Adversarial diversity and hard positive generation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops, pp 25–32

  50. Shen D, Zheng M, Shen Y, Qu Y, Chen W (2020) A simple but tough-to-beat data augmentation approach for natural language understanding and generation. ArXiv preprint arXiv:2009.13818

  51. Wang D, Ding N, Li P, Zheng H (2021) CLINE: contrastive learning with semantic negative examples for natural language understanding. In: Proceedings of the 59th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 11th international joint conference on natural language processing (volume 1: long papers), pp 2332–2342. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.181. https://aclanthology.org/2021.acl-long.181

  52. Miller GA (1992) WordNet: a lexical database for English. In: Speech and natural language: proceedings of a workshop held at Harriman, New York, February 23–26, 1992. https://aclanthology.org/H92-1116

  53. Kim T, Yoo KM, Lee S-g (2021) Self-guided contrastive learning for BERT sentence representations. In: Proceedings of the 59th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 11th international joint conference on natural language processing (volume 1: long papers), pp 2528–2540. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.197. https://aclanthology.org/2021.acl-long.197

  54. Qiu Y, Zhang J, Zhou J (2021) Improving gradient-based adversarial training for text classification by contrastive learning and auto-encoder. In: Findings of the association for computational linguistics: ACL-IJCNLP 2021, pp 1698–1707. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.148. https://aclanthology.org/2021.findings-acl.148

  55. Tian Y, Krishnan D, Isola P (2020) Contrastive multiview coding. In: Computer vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, proceedings, Part XI 16, pp 776–794. Springer

  56. Giorgi J, Nitski O, Wang B, Bader G (2021) DeCLUTR: deep contrastive learning for unsupervised textual representations. In: Proceedings of the 59th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 11th international joint conference on natural language processing (volume 1: long papers), pp 879–895. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.72. https://aclanthology.org/2021.acl-long.72

  57. Devlin J, Chang M-W, Lee K, Toutanova K (2019) BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In: Proceedings of the 2019 conference of the North American Chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, volume 1 (long and short papers), pp. 4171–4186. Association for Computational Linguistics, Minneapolis. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1423. https://aclanthology.org/N19-1423

  58. Khosla P, Teterwak P, Wang C, Sarna A, Tian Y, Isola P, Maschinot A, Liu C, Krishnan D (2020) Supervised contrastive learning. In: Larochelle H, Ranzato M, Hadsell R, Balcan M, Lin H (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 33: annual conference on neural information processing systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6–12, 2020, Virtual. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/hash/d89a66c7c80a29b1bdbab0f2a1a94af8-Abstract.html

  59. Duan X, Zhao J, Xu B (2007) Word sense disambiguation through sememe labeling. In: IJCAI, pp 1594–1599

  60. Meng F (2022) Word sense disambiguation based on graph and knowledge base. In: 4th EAI international conference on robotic sensor networks, pp 31–41. Springer

  61. Niu Y, Xie R, Liu Z, Sun M (2017) Improved word representation learning with sememes. In: Proceedings of the 55th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (volume 1: long papers), pp 2049–2058. Association for Computational Linguistics, Vancouver. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P17-1187. https://aclanthology.org/P17-1187

  62. Fan M, Zhang Y, Li J (2015) Word similarity computation based on hownet. In: 2015 12th international conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery (FSKD), pp 1487–1492. IEEE

  63. Zhu X, Ma R, Sun L, Chen H (2016) Word semantic similarity computation based on HowNet and Cilin. J Chin Inf Process 30(4):29–36

    Google Scholar 

  64. Lin L, Xue F, Ren Z-S (2009) Modified word similarity computation approach based on HowNet. J Comput Appl 1:217–220

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  65. Xianghua F, Guo L, Yanyan G, Zhiqiang W (2013) Multi-aspect sentiment analysis for Chinese online social reviews based on topic modeling and HowNet lexicon. Knowl-Based Syst 37:186–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Luo L, Ao X, Song Y, Li J, Yang X, He Q, Yu D (2019) Unsupervised neural aspect extraction with sememes. In: Kraus S (ed) Proceedings of the twenty-eighth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, IJCAI 2019, Macao, China, August 10–16, 2019, pp 5123–5129. ijcai.org, Macao. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2019/712. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2019/712

  67. Zeng X, Yang C, Tu C, Liu Z, Sun M (2018) Chinese LIWC lexicon expansion via hierarchical classification of word embeddings with sememe attention. In: McIlraith SA, Weinberger KQ (eds) Proceedings of the thirty-second AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, (AAAI-18), the 30th innovative applications of artificial intelligence (IAAI-18), and the 8th AAAI symposium on educational advances in artificial intelligence (EAAI-18), New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, February 2–7, 2018, pp 5650–5657. AAAI Press, San Francisco. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI18/paper/view/16760

  68. Li S, Li B, Yao H, Zhou S, Zhu J, Zeng Z (2022) Completing wordnets with sememe knowledge. Electronics 11(1):79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Liu Y, Zhang M, Ji D (2020) End to end Chinese lexical fusion recognition with sememe knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on computational linguistics, pp 2935–2946. International Committee on Computational Linguistics, Barcelona (Online). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.263. https://aclanthology.org/2020.coling-main.263

  70. Wen Z, Gui L, Wang Q, Guo M, Yu X, Du J, Xu R (2022) Sememe knowledge and auxiliary information enhanced approach for sarcasm detection. Inf Process Manag 59(3):102883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Pennington J, Socher R, Manning C (2014) GloVe: global vectors for word representation. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 1532–1543. Association for Computational Linguistics, Doha. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/D14-1162. https://aclanthology.org/D14-1162

  72. Gong X, Zhao Q, Zhang J, Mao R, Xu R (2020) The design and construction of a Chinese sarcasm dataset. In: Proceedings of the twelfth language resources and evaluation conference, pp 5034–5039. European Language Resources Association, Marseille. https://aclanthology.org/2020.lrec-1.619

  73. Breiman L (1996) Heuristics of instability and stabilization in model selection. Ann Stat 24(6):2350–2383

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  74. Dietterich TG (1998) Approximate statistical tests for comparing supervised classification learning algorithms. Neural Comput 10(7):1895–1923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Nadeau C, Bengio Y (2003) Inference for the Generalization Error. Machine Learning 52:239–281. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024068626366

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Bengio Y, Grandvalet Y (2003) No unbiased estimator of the variance of k-fold cross-validation. In: Thrun S, Saul LK, Schölkopf B (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 16 [neural information processing systems, NIPS 2003, December 8–13, 2003, Vancouver and Whistler, British Columbia, Canada], pp 513–520. MIT Press, Vancouver. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2003/hash/e82c4b19b8151ddc25d4d93baf7b908f-Abstract.html

  77. Oraby S, Harrison V, Reed L, Hernandez E, Riloff E, Walker M (2016) Creating and characterizing a diverse corpus of sarcasm in dialogue. In: Proceedings of the 17th annual meeting of the special interest group on discourse and dialogue, pp 31–41. Association for Computational Linguistics, Los Angeles. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W16-3604. https://aclanthology.org/W16-3604

  78. Walker M, Tree JF, Anand P, Abbott R, King J (2012) A corpus for research on deliberation and debate. In: Proceedings of the eighth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’12), pp. 812–817. European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Istanbul, Turkey. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/1078_Paper.pdf

  79. Ghosh A, Veale T (2016) Fracking sarcasm using neural network. In: Proceedings of the 7th workshop on computational approaches to subjectivity, sentiment and social media analysis, pp 161–169. Association for Computational Linguistics, San Diego. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W16-0425. https://aclanthology.org/W16-0425

  80. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser L, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. In: Guyon I, von Luxburg U, Bengio S, Wallach HM, Fergus R, Vishwanathan SVN, Garnett R (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 30: annual conference on neural information processing systems 2017, December 4–9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, pp 5998–6008. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2017/hash/3f5ee243547dee91fbd053c1c4a845aa-Abstract.html

  81. Lou C, Liang B, Gui L, He Y, Dang Y, Xu R (2021) Affective dependency graph for sarcasm detection. In: Proceedings of the 44th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, pp 1844–1849

  82. Wang F, Liu H (2021) Understanding the behaviour of contrastive loss. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 2495–2504

  83. van der Laurens M, Hinton GE (2008) Visualizing data using t-SNE. J Mach Learn Res 9:2579–2605

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  84. Reimers N, Gurevych I (2019) Sentence-BERT: sentence embeddings using Siamese BERT-networks. In: Proceedings of the 2019 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and the 9th international joint conference on natural language processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pp 3982–3992. Association for Computational Linguistics, Hong Kong. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1410. https://aclanthology.org/D19-1410

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (62006062, 62176076), Natural Science Foundation of GuangDong 2023A1515012922, the Shenzhen Foundational Research Funding (JCYJ20220818102415032), the Major Key Project of PCL2021A06, Guangdong Provincial Key Labo-ratory of Novel Security Intelligence Technologies 2022B1212010005.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joint Lab of HITSZ-CMS, Harbin Institute of Technology (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, 518055, Guangdong, China

    Zhiyuan Wen, Rui Wang, Xuan Luo, Qianlong Wang, Bin Liang, Jiachen Du & Ruifeng Xu

  2. King′s College London, London, UK

    Lin Gui

  3. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Novel Security Intelligence Technologies, Shenzhen, 518000, Guangdong, China

    Zhiyuan Wen, Rui Wang, Xuan Luo, Qianlong Wang, Bin Liang, Jiachen Du & Ruifeng Xu

  4. Peng Cheng Lab, Shenzhen, 518000, Guangdong, China

    Ruifeng Xu

  5. China Merchants Securities Co., Ltd, Shenzhen, 518000, Guangdong, China

    Xiaoqi Yu

Authors
  1. Zhiyuan Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xuan Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Qianlong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bin Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jiachen Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Xiaoqi Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lin Gui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ruifeng Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruifeng Xu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We declared that we have no conflicts of interest to this work.

Statement

The examples presented in the article represent only the personal views of the commenting users.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wen, Z., Wang, R., Luo, X. et al. Multi-perspective contrastive learning framework guided by sememe knowledge and label information for sarcasm detection. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 14, 4119–4134 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-023-01884-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-023-01884-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation