Semantic network

Last updated

Example of a semantic network Semantic Net.svg
Example of a semantic network

A semantic network, or frame network is a knowledge base that represents semantic relations between concepts in a network. This is often used as a form of knowledge representation. It is a directed or undirected graph consisting of vertices, which represent concepts, and edges, which represent semantic relations between concepts, [1] mapping or connecting semantic fields. A semantic network may be instantiated as, for example, a graph database or a concept map. Typical standardized semantic networks are expressed as semantic triples.

Contents

Semantic networks are used in neurolinguistics and natural language processing applications such as semantic parsing [2] and word-sense disambiguation. [3] Semantic networks can also be used as a method to analyze large texts and identify the main themes and topics (e.g., of social media posts), to reveal biases (e.g., in news coverage), or even to map an entire research field. [4]

History

Examples of the use of semantic networks in logic, directed acyclic graphs as a mnemonic tool, dates back centuries. The earliest documented use being the Greek philosopher Porphyry's commentary on Aristotle's categories in the third century AD.

In computing history, "Semantic Nets" for the propositional calculus were first implemented for computers by Richard H. Richens of the Cambridge Language Research Unit in 1956 as an "interlingua" for machine translation of natural languages, [5] although the importance of this work and the Cambridge Language Research Unit was only belatedly realized.

Semantic networks were also independently implemented by Robert F. Simmons [6] and Sheldon Klein, using the first-order predicate calculus as a base, after being inspired by a demonstration of Victor Yngve. The "line of research was originated by the first President of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Victor Yngve, who in 1960 had published descriptions of algorithms for using a phrase structure grammar to generate syntactically well-formed nonsense sentences. Sheldon Klein and I about 1962–1964 were fascinated by the technique and generalized it to a method for controlling the sense of what was generated by respecting the semantic dependencies of words as they occurred in text." [7] Other researchers, most notably M. Ross Quillian [8] and others at System Development Corporation helped contribute to their work in the early 1960s as part of the SYNTHEX project. It's these publications at System Development Corporation that most modern derivatives of the term "semantic network" cite as their background. Later prominent works were done by Allan M. Collins and Quillian (e.g., Collins and Quillian; [9] [10] Collins and Loftus [11] Quillian [12] [13] [14] [15] ). Still later in 2006, Hermann Helbig fully described MultiNet. [16]

In the late 1980s, two universities in the Netherlands, Groningen and Twente, jointly began a project called Knowledge Graphs, which are semantic networks but with the added constraint that edges are restricted to be from a limited set of possible relations, to facilitate algebras on the graph. [17] In the subsequent decades, the distinction between semantic networks and knowledge graphs was blurred. [18] [19] In 2012, Google gave their knowledge graph the name Knowledge Graph.

The semantic link network was systematically studied as a semantic social networking method. Its basic model consists of semantic nodes, semantic links between nodes, and a semantic space that defines the semantics of nodes and links and reasoning rules on semantic links. The systematic theory and model was published in 2004. [20] This research direction can trace to the definition of inheritance rules for efficient model retrieval in 1998 [21] and the Active Document Framework ADF. [22] Since 2003, research has developed toward social semantic networking. [23] This work is a systematic innovation at the age of the World Wide Web and global social networking rather than an application or simple extension of the Semantic Net (Network). Its purpose and scope are different from that of the Semantic Net (or network). [24] The rules for reasoning and evolution and automatic discovery of implicit links play an important role in the Semantic Link Network. [25] [26] Recently it has been developed to support Cyber-Physical-Social Intelligence. [27] It was used for creating a general summarization method. [28] The self-organised Semantic Link Network was integrated with a multi-dimensional category space to form a semantic space to support advanced applications with multi-dimensional abstractions and self-organised semantic links [29] [30] It has been verified that Semantic Link Network play an important role in understanding and representation through text summarisation applications. [31] [32] Semantic Link Network has been extended from cyberspace to cyber-physical-social space. Competition relation and symbiosis relation as well as their roles in evolving society were studied in the emerging topic: Cyber-Physical-Social Intelligence [33]

More specialized forms of semantic networks has been created for specific use. For example, in 2008, Fawsy Bendeck's PhD thesis formalized the Semantic Similarity Network (SSN) that contains specialized relationships and propagation algorithms to simplify the semantic similarity representation and calculations. [34]

Basics of semantic networks

A semantic network is used when one has knowledge that is best understood as a set of concepts that are related to one another.

Most semantic networks are cognitively based. They consist of arcs (spokes) and nodes (hubs) which can be organized into a taxonomic hierarchy. Different semantic networks can also be connected by bridge nodes. Semantic networks contributed to the ideas of spreading activation, inheritance, and nodes as proto-objects.

One process of constructing semantic networks, known also as co-occurrence networks, includes identifying keywords in the text, calculating the frequencies of co-occurrences, and analyzing the networks to find central words and clusters of themes in the network. [35]

In linguistics

In the field of linguistics, semantic networks represent how the human mind handles associated concepts. Typically, concepts in a semantic network can have one of two different relationships: either semantic or associative.

If semantic in relation, the two concepts are linked by any of the following semantic relationships: synonymy, antonymy, hypernymy, hyponymy, holonymy, meronymy, or metonymy, or polysemy. These are not the only semantic relationships, but some of the most common.

If associative in relation, the two concepts are linked based on their frequency to occur together. These associations are accidental, meaning that nothing about their individual meanings requires them to be associated with one another, only that they typically are. Examples of this would be pig and farm, pig and trough, or pig and mud. While nothing about the meaning of pig forces it to be associated with farms, as pigs can be wild, the fact that pigs are so frequently found on farms creates an accidental associated relationship. These thematic relationships are common within semantic networks and are notable results in free association tests.

As the initial word is given, activation of the most closely related concepts begin, spreading outward to the lesser associated concepts. An example of this would be the initial word pig prompting mammal, then animal, and then breathes. This example shows that taxonomic relationships are inherent within semantic networks. The most closely related concepts typically share semantic features, which are determinants of semantic similarity scores. Words with higher similarity scores are more closely related, thus have higher probability of being a close word in the semantic network.

These relationships can be suggested into the brain through priming, where previous examples of the same relationship are shown before the target word is shown. The effect of priming on a semantic network linking can be seen through the speed of the reaction time to the word. Priming can help to reveal the structure of a semantic network and which words are most closely associated with the original word.

Disruption of a semantic network can lead to a semantic deficit, not the same as semantic dementia.

In the Brain

There exists physical manifestation of semantic relationships in the brain as well. Category-specific semantic circuits show that words belonging to different categories are processed in circuits differently located throughout the brain. For example, the semantic circuits for a word associated with the face or mouth (such as lick) is located in a different place of the brain than a word associated with the leg or foot (such as kick). This is a primary result of a 2013 study published by Friedemann Pulvermüller. These semantic circuits are directly tied to their sensorimotor areas of the brain. This is known as embodied semantics, a subtopic of embodied language processing.

If brain damage occurs, the normal processing of semantic networks could be disrupted, leading to preference into what kind of relationships dominate the semantic network in the mind.

Examples

In Lisp

The following code shows an example of a semantic network in the Lisp programming language using an association list.

(setq*database*'((canary(is-abird)(coloryellow)(sizesmall))(penguin(is-abird)(movementswim))(bird(is-avertebrate)(has-partwings)(reproductionegg-laying))))

To extract all the information about the "canary" type, one would use the assoc function with a key of "canary". [36]

WordNet

An example of a semantic network is WordNet, a lexical database of English. It groups English words into sets of synonyms called synsets, provides short, general definitions, and records the various semantic relations between these synonym sets. Some of the most common semantic relations defined are meronymy (A is a meronym of B if A is part of B), holonymy (B is a holonym of A if B contains A), hyponymy (or troponymy) (A is subordinate of B; A is kind of B), hypernymy (A is superordinate of B), synonymy (A denotes the same as B) and antonymy (A denotes the opposite of B).

WordNet properties have been studied from a network theory perspective and compared to other semantic networks created from Roget's Thesaurus and word association tasks. From this perspective the three of them are a small world structure. [37]

Other examples

It is also possible to represent logical descriptions using semantic networks such as the existential graphs of Charles Sanders Peirce or the related conceptual graphs of John F. Sowa. [1] These have expressive power equal to or exceeding standard first-order predicate logic. Unlike WordNet or other lexical or browsing networks, semantic networks using these representations can be used for reliable automated logical deduction. Some automated reasoners exploit the graph-theoretic features of the networks during processing.

Other examples of semantic networks are Gellish models. Gellish English with its Gellish English dictionary, is a formal language that is defined as a network of relations between concepts and names of concepts. Gellish English is a formal subset of natural English, just as Gellish Dutch is a formal subset of Dutch, whereas multiple languages share the same concepts. Other Gellish networks consist of knowledge models and information models that are expressed in the Gellish language. A Gellish network is a network of (binary) relations between things. Each relation in the network is an expression of a fact that is classified by a relation type. Each relation type itself is a concept that is defined in the Gellish language dictionary. Each related thing is either a concept or an individual thing that is classified by a concept. The definitions of concepts are created in the form of definition models (definition networks) that together form a Gellish Dictionary. A Gellish network can be documented in a Gellish database and is computer interpretable.

SciCrunch is a collaboratively edited knowledge base for scientific resources. It provides unambiguous identifiers (Research Resource IDentifiers or RRIDs) for software, lab tools etc. and it also provides options to create links between RRIDs and from communities.

Another example of semantic networks, based on category theory, is ologs. Here each type is an object, representing a set of things, and each arrow is a morphism, representing a function. Commutative diagrams also are prescribed to constrain the semantics.

In the social sciences people sometimes use the term semantic network to refer to co-occurrence networks. [38] [39] The basic idea is that words that co-occur in a unit of text, e.g. a sentence, are semantically related to one another. Ties based on co-occurrence can then be used to construct semantic networks. This process includes identifying keywords in the text, constructing co-occurrence networks, and analyzing the networks to find central words and clusters of themes in the network. It is a particularly useful method to analyze large text and big data. [40]

Software tools

There are also elaborate types of semantic networks connected with corresponding sets of software tools used for lexical knowledge engineering, like the Semantic Network Processing System (SNePS) of Stuart C. Shapiro [41] or the MultiNet paradigm of Hermann Helbig, [42] especially suited for the semantic representation of natural language expressions and used in several NLP applications.

Semantic networks are used in specialized information retrieval tasks, such as plagiarism detection. They provide information on hierarchical relations in order to employ semantic compression to reduce language diversity and enable the system to match word meanings, independently from sets of words used.

The Knowledge Graph proposed by Google in 2012 is actually an application of semantic network in search engine.

Modeling multi-relational data like semantic networks in low-dimensional spaces through forms of embedding has benefits in expressing entity relationships as well as extracting relations from mediums like text. There are many approaches to learning these embeddings, notably using Bayesian clustering frameworks or energy-based frameworks, and more recently, TransE [43] (NIPS 2013). Applications of embedding knowledge base data include Social network analysis and Relationship extraction.

See also

Other examples

Related Research Articles

Knowledge representation and reasoning is the field of artificial intelligence (AI) dedicated to representing information about the world in a form that a computer system can use to solve complex tasks such as diagnosing a medical condition or having a dialog in a natural language. Knowledge representation incorporates findings from psychology about how humans solve problems, and represent knowledge in order to design formalisms that will make complex systems easier to design and build. Knowledge representation and reasoning also incorporates findings from logic to automate various kinds of reasoning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semantic Web</span> Extension of the Web to facilitate data exchange

The Semantic Web, sometimes known as Web 3.0, is an extension of the World Wide Web through standards set by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). The goal of the Semantic Web is to make Internet data machine-readable.

In information science, an ontology encompasses a representation, formal naming, and definitions of the categories, properties, and relations between the concepts, data, or entities that pertain to one, many, or all domains of discourse. More simply, an ontology is a way of showing the properties of a subject area and how they are related, by defining a set of terms and relational expressions that represent the entities in that subject area. The field which studies ontologies so conceived is sometimes referred to as applied ontology.

Word-sense disambiguation (WSD) is the process of identifying which sense of a word is meant in a sentence or other segment of context. In human language processing and cognition, it is usually subconscious/automatic but can often come to conscious attention when ambiguity impairs clarity of communication, given the pervasive polysemy in natural language. In computational linguistics, it is an open problem that affects other computer-related writing, such as discourse, improving relevance of search engines, anaphora resolution, coherence, and inference.

A modeling language is any artificial language that can be used to express data, information or knowledge or systems in a structure that is defined by a consistent set of rules. The rules are used for interpretation of the meaning of components in the structure Programing language.

Semantic memory refers to general world knowledge that humans have accumulated throughout their lives. This general knowledge is intertwined in experience and dependent on culture. New concepts are learned by applying knowledge learned from things in the past.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Concept map</span> Diagram showing relationships among concepts

A concept map or conceptual diagram is a diagram that depicts suggested relationships between concepts. Concept maps may be used by instructional designers, engineers, technical writers, and others to organize and structure knowledge.

Semantic similarity is a metric defined over a set of documents or terms, where the idea of distance between items is based on the likeness of their meaning or semantic content as opposed to lexicographical similarity. These are mathematical tools used to estimate the strength of the semantic relationship between units of language, concepts or instances, through a numerical description obtained according to the comparison of information supporting their meaning or describing their nature. The term semantic similarity is often confused with semantic relatedness. Semantic relatedness includes any relation between two terms, while semantic similarity only includes "is a" relations. For example, "car" is similar to "bus", but is also related to "road" and "driving".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Information model</span>

An information model in software engineering is a representation of concepts and the relationships, constraints, rules, and operations to specify data semantics for a chosen domain of discourse. Typically it specifies relations between kinds of things, but may also include relations with individual things. It can provide sharable, stable, and organized structure of information requirements or knowledge for the domain context.

Frame semantics is a theory of linguistic meaning developed by Charles J. Fillmore that extends his earlier case grammar. It relates linguistic semantics to encyclopedic knowledge. The basic idea is that one cannot understand the meaning of a single word without access to all the essential knowledge that relates to that word. For example, one would not be able to understand the word "sell" without knowing anything about the situation of commercial transfer, which also involves, among other things, a seller, a buyer, goods, money, the relation between the money and the goods, the relations between the seller and the goods and the money, the relation between the buyer and the goods and the money and so on. Thus, a word activates, or evokes, a frame of semantic knowledge relating to the specific concept to which it refers.

Semantic integration is the process of interrelating information from diverse sources, for example calendars and to do lists, email archives, presence information, documents of all sorts, contacts, search results, and advertising and marketing relevance derived from them. In this regard, semantics focuses on the organization of and action upon information by acting as an intermediary between heterogeneous data sources, which may conflict not only by structure but also context or value.

Gellish is an ontology language for data storage and communication, designed and developed by Andries van Renssen since mid-1990s. It started out as an engineering modeling language but evolved into a universal and extendable conceptual data modeling language with general applications. Because it includes domain-specific terminology and definitions, it is also a semantic data modelling language and the Gellish modeling methodology is a member of the family of semantic modeling methodologies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semantic data model</span> Database model

A semantic data model (SDM) is a high-level semantics-based database description and structuring formalism for databases. This database model is designed to capture more of the meaning of an application environment than is possible with contemporary database models. An SDM specification describes a database in terms of the kinds of entities that exist in the application environment, the classifications and groupings of those entities, and the structural interconnections among them. SDM provides a collection of high-level modeling primitives to capture the semantics of an application environment. By accommodating derived information in a database structural specification, SDM allows the same information to be viewed in several ways; this makes it possible to directly accommodate the variety of needs and processing requirements typically present in database applications. The design of the present SDM is based on our experience in using a preliminary version of it. SDM is designed to enhance the effectiveness and usability of database systems. An SDM database description can serve as a formal specification and documentation tool for a database; it can provide a basis for supporting a variety of powerful user interface facilities, it can serve as a conceptual database model in the database design process; and, it can be used as the database model for a new kind of database management system.

A graph database (GDB) is a database that uses graph structures for semantic queries with nodes, edges, and properties to represent and store data. A key concept of the system is the graph. The graph relates the data items in the store to a collection of nodes and edges, the edges representing the relationships between the nodes. The relationships allow data in the store to be linked together directly and, in many cases, retrieved with one operation. Graph databases hold the relationships between data as a priority. Querying relationships is fast because they are perpetually stored in the database. Relationships can be intuitively visualized using graph databases, making them useful for heavily inter-connected data.

A semantic similarity network (SSN) is a special form of semantic network. designed to represent concepts and their semantic similarity. Its main contribution is reducing the complexity of calculating semantic distances. Bendeck introduced the concept of semantic similarity networks (SSN) as the specialization of a semantic network to measure semantic similarity from ontological representations. Implementations include genetic information handling.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to natural-language processing:

In natural language processing (NLP), a text graph is a graph representation of a text item. It is typically created as a preprocessing step to support NLP tasks such as text condensation term disambiguation (topic-based) text summarization, relation extraction and textual entailment.

Semantic queries allow for queries and analytics of associative and contextual nature. Semantic queries enable the retrieval of both explicitly and implicitly derived information based on syntactic, semantic and structural information contained in data. They are designed to deliver precise results or to answer more fuzzy and wide open questions through pattern matching and digital reasoning.

A semantic decomposition is an algorithm that breaks down the meanings of phrases or concepts into less complex concepts. The result of a semantic decomposition is a representation of meaning. This representation can be used for tasks, such as those related to artificial intelligence or machine learning. Semantic decomposition is common in natural language processing applications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Knowledge graph</span> Type of knowledge base

In knowledge representation and reasoning, a knowledge graph is a knowledge base that uses a graph-structured data model or topology to represent and operate on data. Knowledge graphs are often used to store interlinked descriptions of entities – objects, events, situations or abstract concepts – while also encoding the semantics or relationships underlying these entities.

References

  1. 1 2 John F. Sowa (1987). "Semantic Networks". In Stuart C Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. Archived from the original on 8 October 2018. Retrieved 29 April 2008.
  2. ↑ Poon, Hoifung, and Pedro Domingos. "Unsupervised semantic parsing Archived 7 February 2019 at the Wayback Machine ." Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Volume 1-Volume 1. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2009.
  3. ↑ Sussna, Michael. "Word sense disambiguation for free-text indexing using a massive semantic network Archived 21 September 2021 at the Wayback Machine ." Proceedings of the second international conference on Information and knowledge management. ACM, 1993.
  4. ↑ Segev, Elad (2022). Semantic Network Analysis in Social Sciences. London: Routledge. ISBN   9780367636524. Archived from the original on 5 December 2021. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
  5. ↑ Lehmann, Fritz; Rodin, Ervin Y., eds. (1992). Semantic networks in artificial intelligence. International series in modern applied mathematics and computer science. Vol. 24. Oxford; New York: Pergamon Press. p. 6. ISBN   978-0080420127. OCLC   26391254. The first semantic network for computers was Nude, created by R. H. Richens of the Cambridge Language Research Unit in 1956 as an interlingua for machine translation of natural languages.
  6. ↑ Robert F. Simmons (1963). "Synthetic language behavior". Data Processing Management. 5 (12): 11–18.
  7. ↑ Simmons, "Themes From 1972" Archived 1 September 2019 at the Wayback Machine , ACL Anthology, 1982
  8. ↑ Quillian, R. A notation for representing conceptual information: An application to semantics and mechanical English para- phrasing. SP-1395, System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, 1963.
  9. ↑ Allan M. Collins; M. R. Quillian (1969). "Retrieval time from semantic memory". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 8 (2): 240–247. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(69)80069-1.
  10. ↑ Allan M. Collins; M. Ross Quillian (1970). "Does category size affect categorization time?". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 9 (4): 432–438. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(70)80084-6.
  11. ↑ Allan M. Collins; Elizabeth F. Loftus (1975). "A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing". Psychological Review. 82 (6): 407–428. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.82.6.407. S2CID   14217893.
  12. ↑ Quillian, M. R. (1967). Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science, 12(5), 410–430.
  13. ↑ Quillian, M. R. (1968). Semantic memory. Semantic information processing, 227–270.
  14. ↑ Quillian, M. R. (1969). "The teachable language comprehender: a simulation program and theory of language". Communications of the ACM. 12 (8): 459–476. doi: 10.1145/363196.363214 . S2CID   15304609.
  15. ↑ Quillian, R. Semantic Memory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Institute of Technology, 1966.
  16. ↑ Helbig, H. (2006). Knowledge Representation and the Semantics of Natural Language (PDF). ISBN   978-3540244615. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 August 2017. Retrieved 19 March 2018.
  17. ↑ James, P. (1992). "Knowledge Graphs" (PDF). In Van de Riet, R. P. (ed.). Linguistic Instruments in Knowledge Engineering. Elsevier Science Publishers. p. 98. ISBN   978-0444883940. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 August 2016. Note from the cited chapter: The author's name P. James is a pseudonym for the group of researchers that took part in or are still taking part in the project "Knowledge Graphs", that was started as a joint project of the universities of Groningen and Twente in the Netherlands. Alstein, de By, Edens, and Miltenburg were students that contributed to the project. In the course of the project, members of the project group have been R.R. Bakker, H. van den Berg, C. Hoede, M.A.W. Houtsma, H.J. Smit, F.N. Stokman, P.H. de Vries, and M. Willems.
  18. ↑ Hulpus, Ioana; Prangnawarat, Narumol (2015). "Path-Based Semantic Relatedness on Linked Data and Its Use to Word and Entity Disambiguation". The Semantic Web – ISWC 2015: 14th International Semantic Web Conference, Bethlehem, PA, USA, October 11–15, 2015, Proceedings, Part 1. International Semantic Web Conference 2015. Springer International Publishing. p. 444. ISBN   9783319250076.
  19. ↑ McCusker, James P.; Chastain, Katherine (April 2016). "What is a Knowledge Graph?". authorea.com. Archived from the original on 17 June 2021. Retrieved 15 June 2016. usage [of the term 'knowledge graph'] has evolved
  20. ↑ H. Zhuge, Knowledge Grid, World Scientific Publishing Co. 2004.
  21. ↑ H. Zhuge, Inheritance rules for flexible model retrieval. Decision Support Systems 22(4)(1998)379–390
  22. ↑ H. Zhuge, Active e-document framework ADF: model and tool. Information & Management 41(1): 87–97 (2003)
  23. ↑ H.Zhuge and L.Zheng, Ranking Semantic-linked Network, WWW 2003
  24. ↑ H.Zhuge, The Semantic Link Network, in The Knowledge Grid: Toward Cyber-Physical Society, World Scientific Publishing Co. 2012.
  25. ↑ H. Zhuge, L. Zheng, N. Zhang and X. Li, An automatic semantic relationships discovery approach. WWW 2004: 278–279.
  26. ↑ H. Zhuge, Communities and Emerging Semantics in Semantic Link Network: Discovery and Learning, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 21(6)(2009)785–799.
  27. ↑ H.Zhuge, Semantic linking through spaces for cyber-physical-socio intelligence: A methodology, Artificial Intelligence, 175(2011)988–1019.
  28. ↑ H. Zhuge, Multi-Dimensional Summarization in Cyber-Physical Society, Morgan Kaufmann, 2016.
  29. ↑ H. Zhuge, The Web Resource Space Model, Springer, 2008.
  30. ↑ H.Zhuge and Y.Xing, Probabilistic Resource Space Model for Managing Resources in Cyber-Physical Society, IEEE Transactions on Service Computing, 5(3)(2012)404–421.
  31. ↑ X. Sun and H. Zhuge, Summarization of Scientific Paper through Reinforcement Ranking on Semantic Link Network, IEEE ACCESS, 2018, doi : 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2856530.
  32. ↑ M.Cao, X.Sun and H. Zhuge, The contribution of cause-effect link to representing the core of scientific paper—The role of Semantic Link Network, PLOS ONE, 2018, doi : 10.1371/journal.pone.0199303.
  33. ↑ H. Zhuge, Cyber-Physical-Social Intelligence on Human-Machine-Nature Symbiosis, Springer, 2020.
  34. ↑ Bendeck, Fawsy (2008). WSM-P workflow semantic matching platform. München: Verl. Dr. Hut. ISBN   9783899638547. OCLC   501314022.
  35. ↑ Segev, Elad (2022). Semantic Network Analysis in Social Sciences. London: Routledge. ISBN   9780367636524. Archived from the original on 5 December 2021. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
  36. ↑ Swigger, Kathleen. "Semantic.ppt". Archived from the original on 10 May 2013. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
  37. ↑ Steyvers, M.; Tenenbaum, J.B. (2005). "The Large-Scale Structure of Semantic Networks: Statistical Analyses and a Model of Semantic Growth". Cognitive Science. 29 (1): 41–78. arXiv: cond-mat/0110012 . doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2901_3. PMID   21702767. S2CID   6000627.
  38. ↑ Wouter Van Atteveldt (2008). Semantic Network Analysis: Techniques for Extracting, Representing, and Querying Media Content (PDF). BookSurge Publishing. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 November 2021. Retrieved 28 November 2021.
  39. ↑ Segev, Elad (2020). "Textual network analysis: Detecting prevailing themes and biases in international news and social media" . Sociology Compass. 14 (4). doi:10.1111/soc4.12779. S2CID   212890998. Archived from the original on 5 December 2021. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
  40. ↑ Segev, Elad (2022). Semantic Network Analysis in Social Sciences. London: Routledge. ISBN   9780367636524. Archived from the original on 5 December 2021. Retrieved 5 December 2021.
  41. ↑ "Stuart C. Shapiro". Archived from the original on 27 August 2006. Retrieved 29 August 2006.
  42. ↑ "Hermann Helbig". Archived from the original on 4 May 2006. Retrieved 14 March 2006.
  43. ↑ Bordes, Antoine; Usunier, Nicolas; Garcia-Duran, Alberto; Weston, Jason; Yakhnenko, Oksana (2013), Burges, C. J. C.; Bottou, L.; Welling, M.; Ghahramani, Z. (eds.), "Translating Embeddings for Modeling Multi-relational Data" (PDF), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26, Curran Associates, Inc., pp. 2787–2795, archived (PDF) from the original on 20 December 2018, retrieved 29 November 2018

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.