33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Vector-Space Models of Semantic Representation From a Cognitive Perspective: A Discussion of Common Misconceptions

      1 , 1 , 2 , 1 , 2
      Perspectives on Psychological Science
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Models that represent meaning as high-dimensional numerical vectors—such as latent semantic analysis (LSA), hyperspace analogue to language (HAL), bound encoding of the aggregate language environment (BEAGLE), topic models, global vectors (GloVe), and word2vec—have been introduced as extremely powerful machine-learning proxies for human semantic representations and have seen an explosive rise in popularity over the past 2 decades. However, despite their considerable advancements and spread in the cognitive sciences, one can observe problems associated with the adequate presentation and understanding of some of their features. Indeed, when these models are examined from a cognitive perspective, a number of unfounded arguments tend to appear in the psychological literature. In this article, we review the most common of these arguments and discuss (a) what exactly these models represent at the implementational level and their plausibility as a cognitive theory, (b) how they deal with various aspects of meaning such as polysemy or compositionality, and (c) how they relate to the debate on embodied and grounded cognition. We identify common misconceptions that arise as a result of incomplete descriptions, outdated arguments, and unclear distinctions between theory and implementation of the models. We clarify and amend these points to provide a theoretical basis for future research and discussions on vector models of semantic representation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references188

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Conference Proceedings: not found

          Glove: Global Vectors for Word Representation

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization.

            Is perception of the whole based on perception of its parts? There is psychological and physiological evidence for parts-based representations in the brain, and certain computational theories of object recognition rely on such representations. But little is known about how brains or computers might learn the parts of objects. Here we demonstrate an algorithm for non-negative matrix factorization that is able to learn parts of faces and semantic features of text. This is in contrast to other methods, such as principal components analysis and vector quantization, that learn holistic, not parts-based, representations. Non-negative matrix factorization is distinguished from the other methods by its use of non-negativity constraints. These constraints lead to a parts-based representation because they allow only additive, not subtractive, combinations. When non-negative matrix factorization is implemented as a neural network, parts-based representations emerge by virtue of two properties: the firing rates of neurons are never negative and synaptic strengths do not change sign.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              On the psychology of prediction.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Perspectives on Psychological Science
                Perspect Psychol Sci
                SAGE Publications
                1745-6916
                1745-6924
                November 2019
                September 10 2019
                November 2019
                : 14
                : 6
                : 1006-1033
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychology, University of Milano–Bicocca
                [2 ]NeuroMI, Milan Center for Neuroscience, Milan, Italy
                Article
                10.1177/1745691619861372
                31505121
                d1dfdffa-95e6-4f75-ab2b-9726fe77ac57
                © 2019

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article