Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
153 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Semantic Change Characterization with LLMs using Rhetorics (2407.16624v1)

Published 23 Jul 2024 in cs.CL

Abstract: Languages continually evolve in response to societal events, resulting in new terms and shifts in meanings. These changes have significant implications for computer applications, including automatic translation and chatbots, making it essential to characterize them accurately. The recent development of LLMs has notably advanced natural language understanding, particularly in sense inference and reasoning. In this paper, we investigate the potential of LLMs in characterizing three types of semantic change: dimension, relation, and orientation. We achieve this by combining LLMs' Chain-of-Thought with rhetorical devices and conducting an experimental assessment of our approach using newly created datasets. Our results highlight the effectiveness of LLMs in capturing and analyzing semantic changes, providing valuable insights to improve computational linguistic applications.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (47)
  1. Eneko Agirre and Philip Edmonds. 2007. Word sense disambiguation: Algorithms and applications, volume 33. Springer Science & Business Media.
  2. Keith Allan. 2013. The Oxford handbook of the history of linguistics. OUP Oxford.
  3. SentiWordNet 3.0: An enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’10), Valletta, Malta. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
  4. The reversal curse: Llms trained on "a is b" fail to learn "b is a". ArXiv, abs/2309.12288.
  5. Andreas Blank. 2003. Words and concepts in time: Towards diachronic cognitive onomasiology. Trends In Linguistics Studies And Monographs, 143:37–66.
  6. Neural network algorithm for detection of new word meanings denoting named entities. IEEE Access, 10:68499–68512.
  7. Socio-cultural adapted chatbots: Harnessing knowledge graphs and large language models for enhanced context awarenes. In Proceedings of the 1st Worskhop on Towards Ethical and Inclusive Conversational AI: Language Attitudes, Linguistic Diversity, and Language Rights (TEICAI 2024), pages 21–27, St Julians, Malta. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  8. Survey in characterization of semantic change. ArXiv.
  9. Exploring the potential of large language models in computational argumentation. ArXiv, abs/2311.09022.
  10. MelBERT: Metaphor detection via contextualized late interaction using metaphorical identification theories. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 1763–1773, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  11. Language models show human-like content effects on reasoning. ArXiv, abs/2207.07051.
  12. Lauren Fonteyn and Enrique Manjavacas. 2021. Adjusting scope: A computational approach to case-driven research on semantic change. In Workshop on Computational Humanities Research.
  13. Interpretable word sense representations via definition generation: The case of semantic change analysis. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 3130–3148, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  14. Challenges for computational lexical semantic change. ArXiv, abs/2101.07668.
  15. Jie Huang and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2023. Towards reasoning in large language models: A survey. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pages 1049–1065, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  16. Päivi Juvonen and Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm. 2016. The lexical typology of semantic shifts, volume 58. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
  17. Prompting for explanations improves adversarial NLI. is this true? Yes it is true because it weakens superficial cues. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2023, pages 2165–2180, Dubrovnik, Croatia. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  18. Kate Kearns. 2006. The Handbook of English Linguistics. Wiley Online Library.
  19. Adam Kilgarriff. 1997. I don’t believe in word senses. Computers and the Humanities, 31:91–113.
  20. George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. 2008. Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press.
  21. Testing the ability of language models to interpret figurative language. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 4437–4452, Seattle, United States. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  22. MLLabs-LIG at TempoWiC 2022: A generative approach for examining temporal meaning shift. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ever Evolving NLP (EvoNLP), pages 1–6, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (Hybrid). Association for Computational Linguistics.
  23. Rowan Hall Maudslay and Simone Teufel. 2022. Metaphorical polysemy detection: Conventional metaphor meets word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 65–77, Gyeongju, Republic of Korea. International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
  24. George A. Miller. 1995. Wordnet: A lexical database for english. Commun. ACM, 38:39–41.
  25. Orca 2: Teaching small language models how to reason. ArXiv, abs/2311.11045.
  26. OpenAI. 2023. Gpt-4 technical report. ArXiv.
  27. Analyzing semantic change through lexical replacements. ArXiv, abs/2404.18570.
  28. Language models as knowledge bases? 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), pages 2463–2473, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  29. Mohammad Taher Pilehvar and Jose Camacho-Collados. 2019. WiC: the word-in-context dataset for evaluating context-sensitive meaning representations. 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), pages 1267–1273, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  30. Steven Pinker. 2003. The language instinct: How the mind creates language. Penguin UK.
  31. Steven Pinker and Paula Jorde Bloom. 1990. Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13:707 – 727.
  32. Lidia Pivovarova and Andrey Kutuzov. 2021. Rushifteval: a shared task on semantic shift detection for russian. ArXiv.
  33. Word sense disambiguation: A unified evaluation framework and empirical comparison. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers, pages 99–110, Valencia, Spain. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  34. SemEval-2020 task 1: Unsupervised lexical semantic change detection. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, pages 1–23, Barcelona (online). International Committee for Computational Linguistics.
  35. The DURel annotation tool: Human and computational measurement of semantic proximity, sense clusters and semantic change. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pages 137–149, St. Julians, Malta. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  36. Mip: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22:1–39.
  37. Testing theory of mind in large language models and humans. Nature human behaviour.
  38. Survey of computational approaches to lexical semantic change. arXiv: Computation and Language.
  39. Semantic change computation: A successive approach. World Wide Web, 19:375–415.
  40. Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2017. Semantic change.
  41. Ruiyu Wang and Matthew Choi. 2023. Large language models on lexical semantic change detection: An evaluation. ArXiv, abs/2312.06002.
  42. Emergent analogical reasoning in large language models. Nature Human Behaviour, 7:1526 – 1541.
  43. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:24824–24837.
  44. Janyce Wiebe and Rada Mihalcea. 2006. Word sense and subjectivity. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1065–1072, Sydney, Australia. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  45. The unreliability of explanations in few-shot prompting for textual reasoning. In Neural Information Processing Systems.
  46. Lscdiscovery: A shared task on semantic change discovery and detection in spanish. ArXiv, abs/2205.06691.
  47. Neuro-symbolic sentiment analysis with dynamic word sense disambiguation. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets