. Word Sense Disambiguation, which is one of the most challenging problems in the process of machine translation, can be considered as a classification problem. In this paper, we use K-Nearest-Neighbor, as one of the most popular classification methods, as well as some knowledge based resources in order to design a WSD scheme. The success of K-Nearest-Neighbor is tightly dependent on two factors; the features used to represent the context in which an ambiguous word occurs and the distance/similarity measure used for comparison of text vectors. Hence, in the present study, we focus on these two matters. For the first purpose, we extract three sets of features; syntactic features, lexical features and semantic features. In order to produce enriched and useful corpora, we apply preprocessed steps. In this work, we carry out a feature selection process as well as a feature weighting policy in order to fine-tune the classifier. For the second purpose, we try several distance/similarity metrics (rather than one metric) in order to find the most proper one. We also assign and use feature weights and propose a weighted formula for every metric. Moreover, to show that the proposed schemes are not language-dependent, we apply the suggested schemes to two sets of data; English and Persian corpora. The evaluation results, with regards to the feature selection and feature weighting strategies, show that the semantic and syntactic features have a significant effect on the classification ability of the system. The results are also encouraging compared to state of the art.
NavigliR., Word sense disambiguation: A survey, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)41(2) (2009), 10.
2.
MihalceaR., Multilingual word sense disambiguation using wikipedia (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas), 2013.
3.
KumarS., Word Sense Disambiguation (Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University), 2015.
4.
YarowskyD., Decision lists for lexical ambiguity resolution: Application to accent restoration in Spanish and French. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 1994 June, pp. 88–95.
5.
ParameswarappaS. and NarayanaV.M., Kannada Word Sense Disambiguation Using Decision List, Volume, 2, 2013, pp. 272–278.
6.
GaleW.A.ChurchK.W. and YarowskyD., A method for disambiguating word senses in a large corpus, Computers and the Humanities26(5–6), pp. 415–439.
7.
GoutteC., Note on free lunches and cross-validation, Neural Computation9(6) (1997), 1211–15.
8.
AungN.T.T.SoeK.M. and TheinN.L., A Word Sense Disambiguation System Using Naïve Bayesian Algorithm for Myanmar Language, International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research2(9) (2011).
9.
NgH.T. and LeeH.B., Integrating multiple knowledge sources to disambiguate word sense: An exemplar-based approach. In Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 1996 June, pp. 40–47.
10.
EscuderoG.MàrquezL. and RigauG., Boosting applied to word sense disambiguation, In European Conference on Machine Learning, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2000 May, pp. 129–141.
11.
GoldingA.R. and RothD., A winnow-based approach to context-sensitive spelling correction, Machine Learning34(1–3) (1999), 107–130.
12.
ManguL. and BrillE., Automatic rule acquisition for spelling correction, In ICM97 (1997 July), 187–194.
13.
PedersenT., A simple approach to building ensembles of Naive Bayesian classifiers for word sense disambiguation, In Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics conference, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2000 April, pp. 63–69.
14.
ZhongZ. and NgH.T. ,It makes sense: A wide-coverage word sense disambiguation system for free text. In Proceedings of the ACL 2010 System Demonstrations, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010 July, pp. 78–83.
15.
DandalaB.MihalceaR. and BunescuR. ,Word sense disambiguation using Wikipedia, In The People’s Web Meets NLP, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013, pp. 241–262.
16.
NigamK. and McCallumA.K. ,Text Classification from Labeled and Unlabeled Documents using EM, Machine Learning39 (2000), 103–34.
17.
ShinnouH. and SasakiM. ,Unsupervised learning of word sense disambiguation rules by estimating an optimum iteration number in the EM algorithm. In Proceedings of the seventh conference on Natural language learning at HLT-NAACL 2003-Volume 4, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2003 May, pp. 41–48.
18.
AgirreE.MartínezD.de LacalleO.L. and SoroaA. ,Two graph-based algorithms for state-of-the-art WSD. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2006, July, pp. 585–593.
19.
BrodyS. and LapataM. ,March. Bayesian word sense induction. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2009, pp. 103–111.
20.
ManandharS.KlapaftisI.P.DligachD. and PradhanS.S. ,SemEval-2010 task 14: Word sense induction & disambiguation, In Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on semantic evaluation, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010 July, pp. 63–68.
21.
Di MarcoA. and NavigliR. ,Clustering and diversifying web search results with graph-based word sense induction, Computational Linguistics39(3) (2013), 709–754.
22.
NavigliR.JurgensD. and VannellaD. ,Semeval-2013 task 12: Multilingual word sense disambiguation. In Second Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (* SEM), (Vol. 2), 2013 June, pp. 222–231.
23.
ChaplotD.S.BhattacharyyaP. and ParanjapeA. ,Unsupervised Word Sense Disambiguation Using Markov Random Field and Dependency Parser, In AAAI. 2015 January, pp. 2217–2223.
24.
AgirreE.RigauG.PadroL. and AtseriasJ. ,Combining supervised and unsupervised lexical knowledge methods for word sense disambiguation, Computers and the Humanities4(1-2) (2000), 103–108.
25.
YarowskyD. ,Unsupervised word sense disambiguation rivaling supervised methods. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 1995 June, pp. 189–196.
26.
DiabM. and ResnikP. ,An unsupervised method for word sense tagging using parallel corpora, In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002 July, pp. 255–262.
27.
MihltzM. and PohlG. ,Exploiting parallel corpora for supervised word-sense disambiguation in english-hungarian machine translation. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 2006, pp. 1294–1297.
28.
TufişD. and KoevaS. ,Ontology-supported text classification based on cross-lingual word sense disambiguation, In International Workshop on Fuzzy Logic and Applications, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007 July, pp. 447–455.
29.
SarrafzadehB.YakovetsN.CerconeN. and AnA. ,Cross-lingual word sense disambiguation for languages with scarce resources, In Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011 May, pp. 347–358.
30.
BaneaC. and MihalceaR., Word sense disambiguation with multilingual features, In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computational Semantics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2011 January, pp. 25–34.
31.
LefeverE., ParaSense: parallel corpora for word sense disambiguation (Doctoral dissertation, Ghent University), 2012.
32.
Fernandez-OrdonezE.MihalceaR. and HassanS. ,Unsupervised Word Sense Disambiguation with Multilingual Representations, In LREC, 2012 May, pp. 847–851.
33.
DaganI. and ItaiA. ,Word sense disambiguation using a second language monolingual corpus, Computational linguistics20(4) (1994), 563–596.
34.
SchwabD. and GuillaumeN. ,A global ant colony algorithm for word sense disambiguation based on semantic relatedness, In Highlights in Practical Applications of Agents and Multiagent Systems, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 257–264.
35.
AbualhaijaS. and ZimmermannK.H. ,D-Bees: A novel method inspired by bee colony optimization for solving word sense disambiguation, Swarm and Evolutionary Computation27 (2016), 188–195.
36.
RezapourA.FakhrahmadS.M.SadreddiniM.H. and JahromiM.Z. ,An accurate word sense disambiguation system based on weighted lexical features, Literary and Linguistic Computing29(1) (2014), 74–88.
37.
MihalceaR. and YangL. ,TWA Sense Tagged Data, University of North Texas. W WW. cse. unt. edu/ rada/downloads. html, 2003.
38.
AgirreE. and EdmondsP., eds. ,Word sense disambiguation: Algorithms and applications, Vol. 33, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
39.
AhmedF. and NürnbergerA. ,September. Arabic/english word translation disambiguation using parallel corpora and matching schemes, In Proceedings of EAMT (Vol. 8), 2008, p. 28.
40.
BrownP.F.PietraS.A.D.PietraV.J.D. and MercerR.L. ,Word-sense disambiguation using statistical methods, In Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, 1991 June, pp. 264–270.
41.
CloughP. and StevensonM. ,Cross-language information retrieval using eurowordnet and word sense disambiguation, In European Conference on Information Retrieval, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004 April, pp. 327–337.
42.
DiouC.KatsikatsosG. and DelopoulosA. ,December. Constructing Fuzzy Relations fromWordNet forWord Sense Disambiguation. In 2006 First International Workshop on Semantic Media Adaptation and Personalization (SMAP’06), IEEE, 2006, pp. 135–140.
43.
FakhrahmadS.M.RezapourA.R.JahromiM.Z. and SadreddiniM.H. ,A novel approach to machine translation: A proposed language-independent system based on deductive schemes, Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Electrical Engineering38(E1) (2014), 59.
44.
JustesonJ.S. and KatzS.M. ,Principled disambiguation: Discriminating adjective senses with modified nouns, Computational Linguistics21(1) (1995), 1–27.
45.
KilgarriffA.RychlyP.SmrzP. and TugwellD. ,Itri-04-08 the sketch engine, Information Technology105 (2004), 116.
46.
KohonenT.BarnaG. and ChrisleyR. ,Statistical pattern recognition with neural networks: Benchmarking studies. In Neural Networks, IEEE International Conference on, 1988 July, pp. 61–68, IEEE.
47.
LagardaA.L.AlabauV.CasacubertaF.SilvaR. and Diaz-de-LianoE., Statistical post-editing of a rule-based machine translation system, In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Companion Volume: Short Papers, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2009 May, pp. 217–220.
