Fuzzy Logic in Natural Fuzzy Logic in Natural Language Processing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

fuzzy logic in natural fuzzy logic in natural language
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Fuzzy Logic in Natural Fuzzy Logic in Natural Language Processing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Fuzzy Logic in Natural Fuzzy Logic in Natural Language Processing Language Processing ...wild speculation about the nature of truth, and other equally unscientific endeavors. Richard Bergmair Acknowledgments thanks for supervising the


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Fuzzy Logic in Natural Language Processing

Richard Bergmair

Fuzzy Logic in Natural Language Processing

...wild speculation about the nature of truth, and other equally unscientific endeavors.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Acknowledgments

thanks for supervising the project!

Ann Copestake

thanks for reading related manuscripts!

Ted Briscoe Daniel Osherson

thanks for helping with the fuzzy logic!

Ulrich Bodenhofer

thanks for participating in the experiment!

MPhil students 05/06, NLIP Group, RMRS-list, personal friends

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Motivation

a small city near San Francisco What does small'(x) mean in terms of population? What does near'(x,y) mean in terms of distance? How do we deal with the vagueness involved in small and near ?

(Zadeh)

slide-4
SLIDE 4
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Outline

fuzzy logic as a generalization of bivalent logic fuzzy logic in language modelling as a generalization of probabilistic models vagueness and fuzzy semantics putting fuzzy semantics to use in closed domain question answering

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Bivalent Logic

In classical logic: A is a set on domain X iff ∃ characteristic function χA:X→{0,1} such that χA(x)=1 iff xϵA b

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Fuzzy Logic

In fuzzy logic: A is a set on domain X iff ∃ characteristic function μA:X→[0,1] such that μA(x) is a degree of membership. l u

(Zadeh)

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Fuzzy Logic

Let A,B,C be fuzzy sets on X. Then C = A ∩ B with μC(x)=μA(x)∧μB(x) iff ∧:[0,1]x[0,1]→[0,1] with (1) a∧b = b∧a (2) a∧(b∧c) = (a∧b)∧c (3) a≤b  (a∧c)≤(b∧c) (4) a∧1 = a These functions are known as triangular norms.

(see Klement)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Fuzzy Logic

standard triangular norms: ∧M(x,y) = min(x,y) ∧P(x,y) = x*y ∧L(x,y) = max(x+y-1,0) ∧D(x,y) = x if y=1, y if x=1, 0 othw.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Fuzzy Logic

Gödel logic is the logic induced by the

minimum t-norm: x∧y = min(x,y) x∨y = max(x,y) ¬x = 1-x

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Fuzzy Logic

Product logic is the logic induced by the product t-norm: x∧y = x*y x∨y = x+y-x*y ¬x = 1-x

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Fuzzy Logic

Łucasiewicz logic is the logic induced by

the Łucasiewicz t-norm: x∧y = max(x+y-1,0) x∨y = min(x+y,1) ¬x = 1-x

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Fuzzy Logic

∧λ

F(x,y) := logλ(1+ )

(λx-1)(λy-1) λ-1 More generally: Frank-family t-norms: ∧0

F:=∧M, ∧1 F:=∧P, ∧∞:=∧L

∧λ

SS(x,y) := (max(xλ+yλ-1,0))1/λ

Schweizer-Sklar-family t-norms: ∧-∞

SS:=∧M, ∧0 SS:=∧P, ∧∞:=∧D

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Outline

fuzzy logic as a generalization of bivalent logic fuzzy logic in language modelling as a generalization of probabilistic models vagueness and fuzzy semantics putting fuzzy semantics to use in closed domain question answering

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Fuzzy N-grams, regular lg.

μL(〈x1,...,xK〉)= μ(xi,xi+1,xi+N)

i=1 K-N

fuzzy n-grams μL(〈x1,...,xK〉)= μδ(s(i),s(i+1))∧μs(i+1)(xi+1)

∨∧

i=1 K-1

fuzzy regular languages

S (Gaines & Kohout, Doostfatemeh et al, etc.)

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Fuzzy context-free lg.

μL(〈x1,...,xJ〉)= μ(di,C(〈d1,...,di〉)) fuzzy context-free languages ...and so on, up the Chomsky hierarchy.

∨ ∧

i=1 K

〈d1,...,dK〉

(Lee & Zadeh, Carter et al.)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Fuzzy Language Models

Well this is a nice generalization... ...but is there a linguistic reality to this? ... Work on inducing FCFGs from the SUSANNE corpus by Carter et. al (disappointing results) ...for syntax I don't see one.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Fuzzy Semantics

...for semantics, denotations are hard to define using probability densities. 150000

bald(x) x.hair

x.hair = 76273 bald(x) = ?

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Fuzzy Semantics

...and independence assumptions are difficult to justify. Syntax:

l1:cold(x1), l2:rainy(x2), l3:town(x3) l1=l2,l2=l3,x1=x2,x2=x3

Semantics:

l1:cold(x1), l1:rainy(x1), l1:town(x1)

independence holds! independence does not hold!

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Outline

fuzzy logic as a generalization of bivalent logic fuzzy logic in language modelling as a generalization of probabilistic models vagueness and fuzzy semantics putting fuzzy semantics to use in closed domain question answering

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Fuzzy Semantics

150000

bald(x) x.hair

150000

bald(x) x.hair

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

If a city had a year-round average temperature of 12 degrees celsius, it would be natural to call it a cold city: (yes/no) If a skyscraper had 78 floors it would be natural to call it a rather tall skyscraper: (yes/no) ...

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

70000

bald(x) x.hair

slide-24
SLIDE 24

cities domain

N=26 N=26 N=25 N=26 N=23

slide-25
SLIDE 25

cities domain (cont'd)

N=18 N=18 N=13 N=13

slide-26
SLIDE 26

skyscrapers domain

N=14 N=14 N=13 N=13

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

What does this tell us about Fuzzy Semantics?

  • 1. Membership can clearly be judged as

nonincreasing or nondecreasing. ...consistent with the observations about most predicates – but not all due to mistakes in the experimental setup.

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

What does this tell us about Fuzzy Semantics?

  • 2. A “region of fuzzy membership”

can always be clearly identified and distinguished from a region of crisp membership. ...turned out to be tricky to test.

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

κ(x) κ(x)

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

κ(x) κ(x)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

  • 2. A “region of fuzzy membership”

can always be clearly identified and distinguished from a region of crisp membership. ...consistent with the observations about most predicates – but not all due to mistakes in the experimental setup.

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Fuzzy Semantics Experiment

What does this tell us about Fuzzy Semantics?

  • 3. Decision boundaries as well as fuzzy

sets may be contradictory across speakers, but are always consistent for each speaker in isolation. Clearly consistent with observations!

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Ordering-based Semantics

150000

bald(x) x.hair

150000

bald(x) x.hair

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Outline

fuzzy logic as a generalization of bivalent logic fuzzy logic in language modelling as a generalization of probabilistic models vagueness and fuzzy semantics putting fuzzy semantics to use in closed domain question answering

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Characteristic Functions

κ(x) 1

  • ld(x)

x.year

1965 1995

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Characteristic Functions

1

  • ld(x)

x.year

1 MSE=.16

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Database Interface

SELECT x.*, hot(x.temp)∧dry(x.rainfall) AS mu FROM place WHERE mu > 0 ORDER BY mu DESC

hot dry city

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Database Interface

SELECT x.*, z.*, y.*, small(x)∧near(z) AS mu FROM place x, refnear z, place y WHERE x.placeid = z.placeid AND z.fkplaceid = y.placeid AND y.name = 'San Francisco' AND mu > 0 ORDER BY mu DESC

small city near San Francisco

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Database Interface

SELECT x.*, z.*, y.*, dry(x)∧near(z)∧rainy(y) AS mu FROM place x, refnear z, place y WHERE x.placeid = z.placeid AND z.fkplaceid = y.placeid AND mu > 0 ORDER BY mu DESC

dry city near a rainy city

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Linguistic Data Modelling

LEXENT adv { STEM "rather"; TYPE "adv_degree_spec_le"; }; ENTITY place { LEXENT noun { STEM "city"; TYPE "n_intr_le"; ONSET "con"; }; PK placeid; GEN nb "#noun"; INTAT lat; INTAT long; INTAT temp { LEXENT adj { STEM "hot"; TYPE "adj_intrans_le"; ONSET "con"; }; LEXENT adj { STEM "cold"; TYPE "adj_intrans_le"; ONSET "con"; }; GEN ap "#adv #adj"; GEN nb "#ap #noun"; DSCR "If a city had ayear-round average <B>temperature of #temp</B> degrees celsius, it would be natural to call it a <B>#ap</B> city."; }; };

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Linguistic Data Modelling

ENTITY place { ... INTAT temp { ... }; STRAT(10) type; ID(100) placename { TYPE "n_proper_city_le"; ONSET "con"; }; REFERENCE refnear TO MANY place { INTAT distance { LEXENT near { STEM "near"; TYPE "p_reg_le"; ONSET "con"; REL "_NEAR_P_REL"; }; DSCR "If a city was a distance ..." }; }; }

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Outline

fuzzy logic as a generalization of bivalent logic fuzzy logic in language modelling as a generalization of probabilistic models vagueness and fuzzy semantics putting fuzzy semantics to use in closed domain question answering