Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closest Meaning Logic Adapter improvements #65

Closed
gunthercox opened this issue Oct 19, 2015 · 3 comments · Fixed by #140
Closed

Closest Meaning Logic Adapter improvements #65

gunthercox opened this issue Oct 19, 2015 · 3 comments · Fixed by #140

Comments

@gunthercox
Copy link
Owner

The Closest Meaning Logic Adapter currently only checks the path similarity between the first synset for each word (synset1[0].path_similarity(synset2[0])). This heuristic might be more accurate if it selected the maximum (shortest path) pair of synsets for the two words.

Because this operation might greatly increase the amount of time required to process each result, it may be useful to look into the possibility of caching logical evaluations made by this adapter on the statement object when it is saved to the database. Then, the check would only need to be processed if the value of the overall synonymous meaning between two statements had not already been evaluated.

@DarkmatterVale
Copy link
Collaborator

Why did you decide to go with path_similarity as opposed to wup_similarity? The advantage of wup_similarity is that it predicts based on the most specific sense of the word, which might give you a better result depending on what synsets are available for any given word.

@gunthercox
Copy link
Owner Author

Thank you, I didn't know about wup_similarity until now. I will look into it.

@DarkmatterVale
Copy link
Collaborator

No problem! Let me know if I can help in any way. Give me a little lead time though, because I'm currently working on adding a logic adapter for using SVO comparisons ( which requires I redesign part of my regex4dummies library, so its taking a little while ).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants