Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)

The current way of representing semantics or meaning in a sentence is by using the conceptual graphs. Conceptual graphs define concepts and conceptual relations loosely. This causes ambiguity because a word can be classified as a concept or relation. Ambiguity disrupts the process of recognizing gra...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Abdullah, Rusli, Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah, Selamat, Mohd Hasan, Ibrahim, Hamidah, Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar
Format: Conference or Workshop Item
Language:English
Published: Universiti Utara Malaysia 2008
Online Access:http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/1/112-116-CR80.pdf
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Universiti Putra Malaysia
Language: English
id my.upm.eprints.59727
record_format eprints
spelling my.upm.eprints.597272018-03-21T03:33:23Z http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/ Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM) Abdullah, Rusli Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah Selamat, Mohd Hasan Ibrahim, Hamidah Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar The current way of representing semantics or meaning in a sentence is by using the conceptual graphs. Conceptual graphs define concepts and conceptual relations loosely. This causes ambiguity because a word can be classified as a concept or relation. Ambiguity disrupts the process of recognizing graphs similarity, rendering difficulty to multiple graphs interaction. Relational flow is also altered in conceptual graphs when additional linguistic information is input. Inconsistency of relational flow is caused by the bipartite structure of conceptual graphs that only allows the representation of connection between concept and relations but never between relations per se. To overcome the problem of ambiguity, the concept relational model (CRM) described in this article strictly organizes word classes into three main categories; concept, relation and attribute. To do so, CRM begins by tagging the words in text and proceeds by classifying them according to a predefined mapping. In addition, CRM maintains the consistency of the relational flow by allowing connection between multiple relations as well. CRM then uses a set of canonical graphs to be worked on these newly classified components for the representation of semantics. The overall result is better accuracy in text engineering related task like relation extraction. Universiti Utara Malaysia 2008 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed text en http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/1/112-116-CR80.pdf Abdullah, Rusli and Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah and Selamat, Mohd Hasan and Ibrahim, Hamidah and Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar (2008) Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM). In: Knowledge Management International Conference 2008 (KMICe 2008), 10-12 June 2008, Langkawi, Kedah. (pp. 112-116).
institution Universiti Putra Malaysia
building UPM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Putra Malaysia
content_source UPM Institutional Repository
url_provider http://psasir.upm.edu.my/
language English
description The current way of representing semantics or meaning in a sentence is by using the conceptual graphs. Conceptual graphs define concepts and conceptual relations loosely. This causes ambiguity because a word can be classified as a concept or relation. Ambiguity disrupts the process of recognizing graphs similarity, rendering difficulty to multiple graphs interaction. Relational flow is also altered in conceptual graphs when additional linguistic information is input. Inconsistency of relational flow is caused by the bipartite structure of conceptual graphs that only allows the representation of connection between concept and relations but never between relations per se. To overcome the problem of ambiguity, the concept relational model (CRM) described in this article strictly organizes word classes into three main categories; concept, relation and attribute. To do so, CRM begins by tagging the words in text and proceeds by classifying them according to a predefined mapping. In addition, CRM maintains the consistency of the relational flow by allowing connection between multiple relations as well. CRM then uses a set of canonical graphs to be worked on these newly classified components for the representation of semantics. The overall result is better accuracy in text engineering related task like relation extraction.
format Conference or Workshop Item
author Abdullah, Rusli
Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah
Selamat, Mohd Hasan
Ibrahim, Hamidah
Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar
spellingShingle Abdullah, Rusli
Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah
Selamat, Mohd Hasan
Ibrahim, Hamidah
Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar
Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
author_facet Abdullah, Rusli
Abdul Hamid, Jamaliah
Selamat, Mohd Hasan
Ibrahim, Hamidah
Ungku Chulan, Ungku Azmi Iskandar
author_sort Abdullah, Rusli
title Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
title_short Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
title_full Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
title_fullStr Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
title_full_unstemmed Semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (CRM)
title_sort semantics representation in a sentence with concept relational model (crm)
publisher Universiti Utara Malaysia
publishDate 2008
url http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/1/112-116-CR80.pdf
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/59727/
_version_ 1643837156625481728