Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Dan Roth

Publications and source records attributed to Dan Roth.

290 records · Page 17Linked to original sources

Mistake-Driven Learning in Text Categorization

Learning problems in the text processing domain often map the text to a space whose dimensions are the measured features of the text, e.g., its words. Three characteristic properties of this domain are (a) very high dimensionality, (b) both the learned concepts and the instances reside very sparsely in the feature space, and (c) a high variation in the number of active features in an instance. In this work we study three mistake-driven learning algorithms for a typical task of this nature -- text categorization. We argue that these algorithms -- which categorize documents by learning a linear separator in the feature space -- have a few properties that make them ideal for this domain. We then show that a quantum leap in performance is achieved when we further modify the algorithms to better address some of the specific characteristics of the domain. In particular, we demonstrate (1) how variation in document length can be tolerated by either normalizing feature weights or by using negative weights, (2) the positive effect of applying a threshold range in training, (3) alternatives in considering feature frequency, and (4) the benefits of discarding features while training. Overall, we present an algorithm, a variation of Littlestone's Winnow, which performs significantly better than any other algorithm tested on this task using a similar feature set.

cmp-lg↗

Applying Winnow to Context-Sensitive Spelling Correction

Multiplicative weight-updating algorithms such as Winnow have been studied extensively in the COLT literature, but only recently have people started to use them in applications. In this paper, we apply a Winnow-based algorithm to a task in natural language: context-sensitive spelling correction. This is the task of fixing spelling errors that happen to result in valid words, such as substituting {\it to\/} for {\it too}, {\it casual\/} for {\it causal}, and so on. Previous approaches to this problem have been statistics-based; we compare Winnow to one of the more successful such approaches, which uses Bayesian classifiers. We find that: (1)~When the standard (heavily-pruned) set of features is used to describe problem instances, Winnow performs comparably to the Bayesian method; (2)~When the full (unpruned) set of features is used, Winnow is able to exploit the new features and convincingly outperform Bayes; and (3)~When a test set is encountered that is dissimilar to the training set, Winnow is better than Bayes at adapting to the unfamiliar test set, using a strategy we will present for combining learning on the training set with unsupervised learning on the (noisy) test set.

cmp-lg↗