Probabilistic content models,

Probabilistic Content Model, with Applications to Generation and Summarization BRYAN ZHANG HANG|

Outline:

Goal: Modeling Topic Structures of Text

We will use:

Hidden Markov Model

Bigrams

Clustering

Application:

Sentence Ordering

Extractive Summerization

Review: Hidden Markov Model:

S1 S2 S3

O1 O3 O2

STATES

OBSERVATIONS

TRANSITIONS EMISSIONS

Imagine :

You call your friend who lives in a foreign country from time to tim

e. Every time you ask him or her “ What are you up to?”

The possible answers are:

“ walk” “ice cream” “shopping”

“reading” “programming” “kayaking”


Possible answers over a month:

“kayaking” “walk” “ shopping” “kayaking” “programming”…

sunny sunny probably sunny sunny ? Probably rainy


Latent class ( Hidden Part)


S1 S2 S3

O1 O3 O2

TRANSITIONS

probability

EMISSIONS

probability

S


R S S

Programming Read Walk

P(Programming |R)

*

P(R|*) P(S|R) P(S|S)

P(walk|S) P(Read|S)


R S S

Programming Reading Walking

P(Programming |R)

*

P(R|*) P(S|R) P(S|S)

P(walk|S) P(Read|S)

The probability of the sequence Programming Walking Reading given the weather is :

P(R|*) * P(S|R) * P(S|S) * P(Programming |R) * P(walk|S) * P(Read|S )

Exercise:

Rainy Sunny

Walk Clean Go shopping

S

0.1

0.4

0.5 0.6 0.3

0.1

0.3

0.4 0.6 ?

0.4 0.6

What is the state sequence (Start-S1-S2) that can maximize

probability of the observation sequence “ clean shopping”

Transition P. P(R|START)=0.6

P(S |START)=0.4

P(S|R)=0.3

P(S|S)=0.6

P(R|R)=0.7

P(R|S)=0.4

STATES { R, S}

Emission P. P(CLEAN|R)=0.5

P(CLEAN|S)=0.1

P(SHOPPING|R)=0.4

P(SHOPPING|S)=0.3

EMISSIONS{CLEAN,SHOPPING}

START S1 S2

CLEAN SHOPPING

START

P(S |START) P(S|S)P(CLEAN|S) P(SHOPPING|S)

P(S |START) P(R|S) P(CLEAN|S) P(SHOPPING|R)

P(R |START) P(S|R) P(CLEAN|R) P(SHOPPING|S)

P(R |START) P(R|R) P(CLEAN|R) P(SHOPPING|R)

ANSWER IS START-RAIN-RAIN

Probabilistic Content Model

S1 S2 S3

O1 O3 O2

TOPICS


SENTENCES

Sentences are Bigram Sequences

Probability of a n-word sentence generated from a state s is :

Probabilistic Content Model

S1 S2 S3

O1 O3 O2

TOPICS


SENTENCES

TOPICS:

Derived from the content

Partition sentences from the documents within a domai

n-specific collection into k clusters (Initial Clusters) .

Use Bigram Vectors as features

Sentence similarity is the cosine of bigram vectors.

STEP 1

An example of the output: LOCATION INFORMATION

TOPICS:


D(C,C’): Number of documents in which a sentence from C immediately

precedes one from C’

D(C): Number of documents containing sentences from C.

For two States C,C’, smoothed estimate of state transition probability is:

EM-like Viterbi Re-estimation

we can compute the transition probability from the initial sentence clusters (Topic Clusters)

Hidden Markov Model can estimate the topics of sentences

Assign sentence s in the topic clusters as the estimated topic.

Cluster/estimate cycle is repeated until the clusters stabilize

TOPICS:


STEP 2

Evaluation Task 1

Information Ordering

Information ordering task is essential to many text-

synthesis applications

e.g. concept-to-text generation, multi-document

summarization.

Evaluation Task 1


Evaluation Task 1


Num. of Sentences

Evaluation Task 1


Number of Order of Sentences:

3 sentences= 3*2*1=6 kinds of different sentence order

4 sentences =4*3*2*1=24

Number of sentences over 10 means :

There are over 3 million kinds of different orders .

Evaluation Task 1


Generate all the sentence orders

Compute Probability of each order

Rank the orders by probability

Metric :

OSO: Original Sentence Order:

Position of Original Sentence in the ranked list

Baseline:

Word bigram model

Evaluation Task 1


Rank is the Rank of the original sentence order (OSO)

by the model

OSO prediction rate is the percentage of the test

cases in which the model gives highest probability to

the OSO among all possible permutations.

Evaluation Task 1


Indicator of the swaps

•Lapata’ technique is feature-rich method (in this

experiment using linguistic features such as noun-

verb dependency.

•It aggravates the data sparseness problems

for a smaller corpus

Kendall T: measure how much an ordering

differs from the OSO

Evaluation Task 2

Summarization

Baseline: the “Lead” baseline, pick the first L sentences

Sentence classifer:

1.each sentence is labelled “ in” or “ out” of the summary

2.features for each sentence are unigrams and its location,

which means we look at the words and their location in the

sentences.

Evaluation Task 2

Summarization Probabilistic Content Model:

All the sentences in the documents are assigned with the topics

All the sentences in the summaries are assigned with the topics

Probability( Topic A in summary)=

(Number of documents in summary where topic A appears)

(Number of documents in documents where topic A appears )

Sentences in which its topic has high appearance probability in

summaries are extracted.

Evaluation Task 1


Content Model outperforms sentence-level,

Locally-focused method and L baseline

Content model

Word+ Location

baseline

Relation Between Two Tasks

Single Domain: Earthquakes

Ordering : OSO prediction rate

Summarization: Extractive accuracy

Optimization of parameters on one task promises to yield good performance on the other

This content model serves as effective representation of text structure in general

Conclusions:

In this paper , this unsupervised, knowledge-lean method validates the

hypothesis:

Word distribution patterns strongly correlate with discourse patterns within a

text ( at least specific domains)

Future direction :

This model is a domain-dependent model

Incorporation of domain-independent relations in the transition structure of

the content model.

Probabilistic content models,

Data & Analytics

Transcript of Probabilistic content models,