Paper detail

Computing Lexical Contrast

Knowing the degree of semantic contrast between words has widespread application in natural language processing, including machine translation, information retrieval, and dialogue systems. Manually-created lexicons focus on opposites, such as {\rm hot} and {\rm cold}. Opposites are of many kinds such as antipodals, complementaries, and gradable. However, existing lexicons often do not classify opposites into the different kinds. They also do not explicitly list word pairs that are not opposites but yet have some degree of contrast in meaning, such as {\rm warm} and {\rm cold} or {\rm tropical} and {\rm freezing}. We propose an automatic method to identify contrasting word pairs that is based on the hypothesis that if a pair of words, $A$ and $B$, are contrasting, then there is a pair of opposites, $C$ and $D$, such that $A$ and $C$ are strongly related and $B$ and $D$ are strongly related. (For example, there exists the pair of opposites {\rm hot} and {\rm cold} such that {\rm tropical} is related to {\rm hot,} and {\rm freezing} is related to {\rm cold}.) We will call this the contrast hypothesis. We begin with a large crowdsourcing experiment to determine the amount of human agreement on the concept of oppositeness and its different kinds. In the process, we flesh out key features of different kinds of opposites. We then present an automatic and empirical measure of lexical contrast that relies on the contrast hypothesis, corpus statistics, and the structure of a {\it Roget}-like thesaurus. We show that the proposed measure of lexical contrast obtains high precision and large coverage, outperforming existing methods.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.