What do character-level models learn about morphology? The case of dependency parsing (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | morphologically rich languages require character-level input models to learn morphology, but some models are poor at disambiguating some words . authors of this study show that character- level models learn a lot from input input . explicit modeling of morphologies is expensive and expensive, authors say . |
| Approach: | They compare character-level models to an oracle with explicit morphological analysis . they show that explicitly modeling morphology improves their best model . |
| Outcome: | The results show that character-level models learn morphology better than word models . the authors compare character-based models to oracles on 12 languages with morphological typologies . |
Similar Papers
Character-Level Models versus Morphology in Semantic Role Labeling (P18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Character-level models are used for high-level semantic analysis tasks such as semantic role labeling. |
| Approach: | They train character-level models that use word, character and morphology level information . they analyze how performance of characters compare to words and a variety of morphological typologies . |
| Outcome: | The results shed light on important characteristics of character-level models and their semantic capability. |
Explaining Character-Aware Neural Networks for Word-Level Prediction: Do They Discover Linguistic Rules? (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Character-level features are used in many natural language processing algorithms but little is known about the character-level patterns they learn. |
| Approach: | They extend contextual decomposition technique to convolutional neural networks and bidirectional long-term memory networks to evaluate and compare these models for morphological tagging on three morphology-dependent languages. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models implicitly discover understandable linguistic rules for morphological tagging on three morphology-dependent languages. |
A Framework for Understanding the Role of Morphology in Universal Dependency Parsing (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a measure of morphological complexity is used to characterize syntactic information in word embeddings. |
| Approach: | They propose a measure of morphological complexity in terms of governor-dependent preferential attachment that explains parsing performance. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves parsing performance on morphologically rich languages using morphology as a syntactic marker. |
How Do Language Models Acquire Character-Level Information? (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Language models (LMs) implicitly encode character-level information, despite not being explicitly provided during training. |
| Approach: | They analyze how language models acquire character-level knowledge by comparing them to standard settings. |
| Outcome: | The results show that LMs do not treat words as opaque tokens, but instead treat them as tokens. |
Morphology Without Borders: Clause-Level Morphology (2022.tacl-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Morphological tasks use large multi-lingual datasets that organize words into inflection tables . lack of a clear linguistic and operational definition of what is a word impairs universality of tasks . |
| Approach: | They propose to view morphology as a clause-level phenomenon, rather than word-level . they propose to use a dataset for clause- level morphological tasks in 4 different languages . |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset for clause-level morphology covers 4 typologically different languages: English, German, Turkish, and Hebrew. |
A Little Pretraining Goes a Long Way: A Case Study on Dependency Parsing Task for Low-resource Morphologically Rich Languages (2021.eacl-srw)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Neural dependency parsing has been a success for many domains and languages, but the bottleneck of massive labelled data limits its effectiveness for low resource languages. |
| Approach: | They propose to use morphological knowledge to improve dependency parsing for morphology rich languages in a low-resource setting to perform experiments. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves an average gain of 2 points (UAS) and 3.6 points (LAS) on 10 MRLs in low-resource settings. |
Getting The Most Out of Your Training Data: Exploring Unsupervised Tasks for Morphological Inflection (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Pre-trained transformers have been shown to be effective in many natural language tasks, but are under-explored for character-level sequence to sequence tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to use pre-trained transformers for character-level morphological inflection in several languages to train models for unsupervised tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms the best two shared tasks on morphological inflection and graphemeto-phoneme conversion benchmarks. |
What is the best recipe for character-level encoder-only modelling? (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | aims to benchmark recent progress in language understanding models that output contextualised representations at the character level. |
| Approach: | They aim to find the best way to build and train character-level BERT-like models by comparing architectural innovations with pretraining objectives. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms a token-based model on a set of evaluation tasks with a fixed training procedure. |
From SPMRL to NMRL: What Did We Learn (and Unlearn) in a Decade of Parsing Morphologically-Rich Languages (MRLs)? (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a decade has passed since the establishment of SPMRL to address the peculiar challenges of Statistical Parsing for Morphologically-rich languages (MRLs). |
| Approach: | They propose a framework for parsing MRLs and propose implementing symbolic ideas into modern neural architectures. |
| Outcome: | The proposed strategies are based on the multi-tagging task in Hebrew, a morphologically-rich, high-fusion, language. |
Confounding Factors in Relating Model Performance to Morphology (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | morphological differences between languages are unclear, but are often considered unimportant . confounding factors make it hard to compare results and draw conclusions, authors argue . |
| Approach: | They propose to use token bigram metrics to predict difficulty of causal language modeling . they argue that confounding factors are contributing to the conflicting evidence . |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics better capture the relation between morphology and tokenization compared to word-based models. |