I am looking for an algorithm that tries to check
1) the similarity of sentences (around 5000) with each other in a document
2) the similarity of multiple documents (around 5000) with respect to each other
I need the same because I'm trying to evaluate whether the text documents/ sentences coming under a particular category are in any manner similar to each other . Are there any existing methods for doing the same.
The standard approach is to use cosine similarity, with TF-IDF normalization.
There are many variants of this, you will need to experiment what works best for you.
Related
Consider a search system where the user submits a query ‘query’ and retrieves products based on some ranking algorithm. Assume that these products are ordered according to their quality such that p_0, p_1, …, p_10 and so on.
I would like to generate vector embeddings that mimic this ranking algorithm. The closest product vector to a query vector should ideally be p_0, the next one should be p_1 and so on.
I have tried to building word2vec embeddings for products by feeding products that have appeared in the same search session as sentences. Then, I have calculated the weighted average of product vectors to find query vectors to make the query vector closer to the top result. Although the closest result is usually the best result for a given query, the subsequent results include some results that would never appear as a top result.
Is there a trick that the word2vec can learn the ranking algorithm or any other techniques that I can try? I have looked into multi-dimensional vector scaling with non-metric distances but it did not seem scalable to me for more than 100Ks of products.
There's no one trick – just iteratively improving your representations, & training set, & ranking methods to better meet your goals.
Word2vec-based representations can often help, but are still fairly simple & centered on individual words – whose senses may vary based on context & position in ways that a simple weighted-average-of-tokens fails to capture.
You may want to represent 'products' by more than just a string-of-word-tokens – to include other properties, as well. These could be scalar values like prices or various other kinds of ratings/properties, or extra synthetic labels, such as the result of other salient groupings (whether hand-edited or learned).
And even if just working with natural-language product descriptions – like product names, or descriptions, or reviews – there are other more-sophisticated text-representations that can be trained or used – such as sentence/document embeddings using deeper-networks than plain word2vec.
Most generically, if you have a bunch of quantitative representations of candidate results, and a query, and want to use some initial examples of "good" results to bootstrap more generalizable rules for scoring top results, you are attempting a "learning-to-rank" process:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_to_rank
To suggest more specific steps would require a more specific description of inputs/outputs/goals, & what's been tried, and how what's been tried has failed.
For example, are your queries always just textual product names? In such a case, maybe plain keyword search is the central technology required – with things like word-vector-modelling just a tweak for handling some tough cases, like expanding the results, or adding more contrast to the rankings, when results are too few or to many.
Or, can you detect key gaps in the modeling related to exactly those cases where "results include some results that would [ideally] never appear as a top result"? If certain things like rare (poorly-modeled) words, or important qualities not yet captured in the model, seem to be to blame for such cases, that will guide the potential set of corrective changes.
I have a question about the word representation algorithms:
Which one of the algorithms word2Vec, doc2Vec and Tf-IDF is more suitable for handling text classification tasks ?
The corpus used in my supervised learning classification is composed of a list of multiple sentences, with both short length sentences and long length ones. As discussed in this thread, doc2vec vs word2vec choice is a matter of document length. As for Tf-Idf vs. word embedding, it's more a matter of text representation.
My other question is, what if for the same corpus I had more than one label to link to the sentences in it ? If I create multiple entries/labels for the same sentence, it affects the decision of the final classification algorithm. How can I tell the model that every label counts equal for every sentence of the document ?
Thank you in advance,
You should try multiple methods of turning your sentences into 'feature vectors'. There are no hard-and-fast rules; what works best for your project will depend a lot on your specific data, problem-domains, & classification goals.
(Don't extrapolate guidelines from other answers – such as the one you've linked that's about document-similarity rather than classification – as best practices for your project.)
To get initially underway, you may want to focus on some simple 'binary classification' aspect of your data, first. For example, pick a single label. Train on all the texts, merely trying to predict if that one label applies or not.
When you have that working, so you have a understanding of each step – corpus prep, text processing, feature-vectorization, classification-training, classification-evaluation – then you can try extending/adapting those steps to either single-label classification (where each text should have exactly one unique label) or multi-label classification (where each text might have any number of combined labels).
I have a large corpus of words extracted from the documents. In the corpus are words which might mean the same.
For eg: "command" and "order" means the same, "apple" and "apply" which does not mean the same.
I would like to merge the similar words, say "command" and "order" to "command".
I have tried to use word2vec but it doesn't check for semantic similarity of words(it ouputs good similarity for apple and apply since four characters in the words are the same). And when I try using wup similarity, it gives good similarity score if the words have matching synonyms whose results are not that impressive.
What could be the best approach to reduce semantically similar words to get rid of redundant data and merge similar data?
I believe one of the options here is using WordNet. It gives you a list of synonyms for the word, so you may merge them together given you know its part of speech.
However, I'd like to point out that "order" and "command" are not the same, e.g. you do not command food in restaurants and such homonymy is true for many-many words.
Also I'd like to point out that for Word2vec spelling is irrelevant and is not taken into consideration at all, the algorithm considers only concurrent usage. I suppose you might be mixing it with FastText.
However, there should be some problems with your model.
Because in a standard set of embeddings distance between these concepts should be large. MUSE FastText similarity between "apple" and "apply" is only 0.15, which is quite low.
I use Gensim's function
model.similarity("apply", "apple")
So you might need to fix learning parameters or just use a pretrained model.
i have a small system of about 1000 documents.
For each document I would like to show links to the X "most similar" documents.
However, the documents are not labeled in any way, so this would be some kind of unsupervised method.
It feels like fasttext would be a good candidate, but I cant wrap my head around how to do it when its not labeled data.
I can calculate the word vectors, although what I really need is a vector for the whole document.
The Paragraph Vector algorithm, known as Doc2Vec in libraries like Python gensim, can train a model that will give a single vector for a run-of-text, and so could be useful for your need. Note, though, that typical published work uses tens-of-thousands to millions of documents. (Just 1,000 would be a very small training set.)
You can also simply average all the word-vectors of a text together (perhaps in some weighted fashion) to get a simple, crude vector for the full text, that will often somewhat work for this purpose. (You could use word-vectors from classi word2vec or FastText for this purpose.)
Similarly, if you have word-vectors but not full doc-vectors, there's a technique called "Word Mover's Distance" that calculates a word-vector-adjusted "distance" between two texts. It often does well in highlighting near-paraphrases, though it's somewhat expensive to calculate (especially for longer texts).
In some cases, just converting all docs to their "bag of words" representation – a giant vector containing counts of words used – then ranking docs by how many words they share is a good enough similarity measure.
Also, full-text index/search frameworks, like SOLR or ElasticSearch, can sometimes take full documents as queries, giving nicly ranked results. (This often works by picking the example document's most significant words, and using those words as fuzzy full-text queries against the full document set.)
I am using H2O machine learning package to do natural language predictions, including the functions h2o.word2vec and h2o.transform. I need sentence level aggregation, which is provided by the AVERAGE parameter value:
h2o.transform(word2vec, words, aggregate_method = c("NONE", "AVERAGE"))
However, in my case I strongly wish to avoid equal weighting of "the" and "platypus" for example.
Here's a scheme I concocted to achieve custom word-weightings. If H2O's word2vec "AVERAGE" option uses all the words including duplicates that might appear, then I could effect a custom word weighting when calling h2o.transform by adding additional duplicates of certain words to my sentences, when I want to weight them more heavily than other words.
Can any H2O experts confirm that that the word2vec AVERAGE parameter is using all the words rather than just the unique words when computing AVERAGE of the words in sentence?
Alternatively, is there a better way? I tried but I find myself unable to imagine any correct math to multiply the sentence average by some factor, after it was already computed.
Yes, h2o.transform will consider each occurrence of a word for the averaging, not just the unique words. Your trick will therefore work.
There is currently no direct way to provide user defined weights. You could probably do an ugly hack and weight directly the word embeddings but that won't be a straightforward solution I could recommend.
We can add this feature to H2O. I would love to hear what API would work for you (how would you like to provide the weights).