Semantic Roles
Semantic Roles
Semantic Roles
How the arguments of a predicate map to functional elements of the event the predicate
is about
I The idea goes all the way back to Panini (Pān.ini circa 350BC)
I Donald Davidson’s event representation for logical form
I Postulate an event, e
I Assert the type of e via a unary predicate
I crossing(e)
I Assert e’s attribute values via binary predicate named after the
attribute with its second argument being the value
I agent(e, John), patient(e, EnglishChannel)
I Thematic roles 6= semantic roles
I Express important arguments of a predicate
I As a potential terminological confusion, theme is just one of
many thematic roles
VerbNet
Gathers knowledge about verbs
I Class hierarchy of verbs that maps out what alternations each verb
participates in
I Verbs that support the dative alternation
I Verbs of future having: advance, allocate, offer, owe
I Verbs of sending: forward, hand, mail
I Verbs of throwing: kick, pass, throw
I Levin’s classification
I 47 high-level classes
I 193 low-level classes
I 3,100 verbs
NomBank
Project for annotations on nouns
FrameNet
Semantic role labeling based on commonsense (background) knowledge
I Distinct sentences, with different verbs and nouns, may map to the
same meaning
I The price of oil increased 7%
I Oil went up 7%
I We saw an escalation of 7% in the price of oil
I The idea is to represent the meaning of a sentence in a normalized
form
I Frame ≈ model ≈ script
I Representation of background knowledge that lends meaning to
language
I Each word produces one or more frames
I Frame elements: frame-specific semantic roles
I Frame predicates: those applicable to these roles
Core Roles
item The entity that has a position on the scale
attribute A scalar property of the item whose value is changing
difference The displacement of the item on the scale
initial value Position on the scale from which the item moves
initial state item’s state before change: independent predication
final value Position on the scale where the item ends up
final state item’s state after change: independent predication
value range Part of the scale over which the attribute varies
Selected Noncore Roles
duration Over which the change takes place
speed The rate of change of the attribute’s value
group The group in which an item changes the value of an
attribute in a specified way
Verbs
advance climb decline decrease diminish dip
double drop dwindle edge explode fall
fluctuate gain grow increase jump move
mushroom plummet reach rise rocket shift
skyrocket slide soar swell swing triple
tumble
Nouns
decline decrease escalation explosion fall fluctuation
gain growth hike increase rise shift
tumble
Adverbs
increasingly
Selectional Restrictions
Constraints on a word’s arguments that reflects its meaning
Consider I ate tofu today I ate nearby today
I Typical reading of eat in the “nearby” sentence
I Intransitive
I Nearby indicates location of the eating event
I Funny reading of eat in the “nearby” sentence
I Transitive
I Nearby indicates its direct object
I Selectional restriction: theme of eat is (usually) edible
I Associated with a word sense, not an entire lexeme
I Two senses for serves, whose , respectively
Emirates serves breakfast and lunch theme is food
Emirates serves Dubai and Mumbai theme is location
I Adjectives can have arguments too: odorless applies naturally to
objects that can have an odor
Silence of the Lambs: I am having an old friend for dinner
Munindar P. Singh (NCSU) Natural Language Processing Fall 2020 261
Semantic Roles
Selectional Preferences
Generalizing beyond hard restrictions
I Strict restrictions are often violated in language
I With negation: can’t eat gold
I With anomalous or surprising occurrences: eat glass
I Selectional preference strength—how selective a verb is
I Eat is informative about its direct objects
I Be is not too informative about its direct objects
I Compare probability distributions of object class c with object class c
given verb v
I P(c|v ): actual distribution of c given v
I P(c): approximation of above not knowing v
I KL divergence from P(c|v ) to P(c): How much information verb
v carries about its arguments
P(c|v )
S(v ) = ∑ P(c|v ) log
c P(c)
I Human judgments
I About plausibility of verb-argument pairs
I Use as basis for correlation with a model
I Pseudowords: for each verb
I Take a legitimate argument
I Generate a confounder as the nearest neighbor in the sense of
having a frequency closest to but greater than the legitimate
argument
I Evaluate how often a model chooses the legitimate word or the
confounder
I Variations on how to generate the confounders