Advertisement

Impact of Entity Graphs on Extracting Semantic Relations

  • Rashedur RahmanEmail author
  • Brigitte Grau
  • Sophie Rosset
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 795)

Abstract

Relation extraction (RE) between a pair of entity mentions from text is an important and challenging task specially for open domain relations. Generally, relations are extracted based on the lexical and syntactical information at the sentence level. However, global information about known entities has not been explored yet for RE task. In this paper, we propose to extract a graph of entities from the overall corpus and to compute features on this graph that are able to capture some evidences of holding relationships between a pair of entities. The proposed features boost the RE performance significantly when these are combined with some linguistic features.

References

  1. 1.
    GuoDong, Z., Jian, S., Jie, Z., Min, Z.: Exploring various knowledge in relation extraction. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 427–434. Association for Computational Linguistics (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bunescu, R.C., Mooney, R.J.: A shortest path dependency kernel for relation extraction. In: Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 724–731. Association for Computational Linguistics (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fundel, K., Küffner, R., Zimmer, R.: Relex–relation extraction using dependency parse trees. Bioinformatics 23(3), 365–371 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nguyen, T.H., Grishman, R.: Relation extraction: Perspective from convolutional neural networks. In: VS@ HLT-NAACL, pp. 39–48 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Augenstein, I.: Web Relation Extraction with Distant Supervision. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sheffield (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Han, X., Sun, L., Zhao, J.: Collective entity linking in web text: a graph-based method. In: Proceedings of the 34th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 765–774. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedl, D.M.B., Heidemann, J., et al.: A critical review of centrality measures in social networks. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2(6), 371–385 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rahman, R., Grau, B., Rosset, S.: Community graph and linguistic analysis to validate relationships for knowledge base population. In: 4th Annual International Symposium on Information Management and Big Data (SIMBig) (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou, G., Zhang, M., Ji, D., Zhu, Q.: Tree kernel-based relation extraction with context-sensitive structured parse tree information. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL) (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jiang, J., Zhai, C.: A systematic exploration of the feature space for relation extraction. In: HLT-NAACL, pp. 113–120 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gamallo, P., Garcia, M., Fernández-Lanza, S.: Dependency-based open information extraction. In: Proceedings of the Joint Workshop on Unsupervised and Semi-supervised Learning in NLP, pp. 10–18. Association for Computational Linguistics (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoffmann, R., Zhang, C., Ling, X., Zettlemoyer, L., Weld, D.S.: Knowledge-based weak supervision for information extraction of overlapping relations. In: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, vol. 1, pp. 541–550. Association for Computational Linguistics (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mooney, R.J., Bunescu, R.C.: Subsequence kernels for relation extraction. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 171–178 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mintz, M., Bills, S., Snow, R., Jurafsky, D.: Distant supervision for relation extraction without labeled data. In: Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP, vol. 2, pp. 1003–1011. Association for Computational Linguistics (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chowdhury, M.F.M., Lavelli, A.: Combining tree structures, flat features and patterns for biomedical relation extraction. In: Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 420–429. Association for Computational Linguistics (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Riedel, S., Yao, L., McCallum, A.: Modeling relations and their mentions without labeled text. In: Balcázar, J.L., Bonchi, F., Gionis, A., Sebag, M. (eds.) ECML PKDD 2010. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6323, pp. 148–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15939-8_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Surdeanu, M., Tibshirani, J., Nallapati, R., Manning, C.D.: Multi-instance multi-label learning for relation extraction. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, pp. 455–465. Association for Computational Linguistics (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vu, N.T., Adel, H., Gupta, P., Schütze, H.: Combining recurrent and convolutional neural networks for relation classification. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, San Diego, California, pp. 534–539. Association for Computational Linguistics, June 2016Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zheng, S., Xu, J., Zhou, P., Bao, H., Qi, Z., Xu, B.: A neural network framework for relation extraction: learning entity semantic and relation pattern. Knowl. Based Syst. 114, 12–23 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dligach, D., Miller, T., Lin, C., Bethard, S., Savova, G.: Neural temporal relation extraction. In: EACL 2017, p. 746 (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gardner, M., Mitchell, T.M.: Efficient and expressive knowledge base completion using subgraph feature extraction. In: EMNLP, pp. 1488–1498 (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang, Q., Liu, J., Luo, Y., Wang, B., Lin, C.: Knowledge base completion via coupled path ranking. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1308–1318 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu, D., Ji, H.: Unsupervised person slot filling based on graph mining. In: ACL (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guo, Y., Che, W., Liu, T., Li, S.: A graph-based method for entity linking. In: IJCNLP, Citeseer, pp. 1010–1018 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Holzinger, A., Ofner, B., Stocker, C., Calero Valdez, A., Schaar, A.K., Ziefle, M., Dehmer, M.: On graph entropy measures for knowledge discovery from publication network data. In: Cuzzocrea, A., Kittl, C., Simos, D.E., Weippl, E., Xu, L. (eds.) CD-ARES 2013. LNCS, vol. 8127, pp. 354–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40511-2_25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manning, C.D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S.J., McClosky, D.: The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) System Demonstrations, pp. 55–60 (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bonacich, P., Lloyd, P.: Eigenvector-like measures of centrality for asymmetric relations. Soc. Netw. 23(3), 191–201 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRT SystemX, LIMSI, CNRSUniversité Paris-SaclayOrsayFrance
  2. 2.LIMSI, CNRS, ENSIIEUniversité Paris-SaclayOrsayFrance
  3. 3.LIMSI, CNRSUniversité Paris-SaclayOrsayFrance

Personalised recommendations