Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Virginia Teller

dblp:61/5006 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2004
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 2 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Information extraction and text analysis · 77% Language models and text generation · 23%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
text segmentation
0.011994
A Probabilistic Algorithm for Segmenting Non-Kanji Japanese Strings · AAAI 1994
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
japanese text processing
0.011994
A Probabilistic Algorithm for Segmenting Non-Kanji Japanese Strings · AAAI 1994

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

probabilistic segmentation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2004 Research Paper: A Multi-aspect Comparison Study of Supervised Word Sense Disambiguation
abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate relations among different aspects in supervised word sense disambiguation (WSD; supervised machine learning for disambiguating the sense of a term in a context) and compare supervised WSD in the biomedical domain with that in the general English domain. METHODS: The study involves three data sets (a biomedical abbreviation data set, a general biomedical term data set, and a general English data set). The authors implemented three machine-learning algorithms, including (1) naïve Bayes (NBL) and decision lists (TDLL), (2) their adaptation of decision lists (ODLL), and (3) their mixed supervised learning (MSL). There were six feature representations (various combinations of collocations, bag of words, oriented bag of words, etc.) and five window sizes (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10). RESULTS: Supervised WSD is suitable only when there are enough sense-tagged instances with at least a few dozens of instances for each sense. Collocations combined with neighboring words are appropriate selections for the context. For terms with unrelated biomedical senses, a large window size such as the whole paragraph should be used, while for general English words a moderate window size between 4 and 10 should be used. The performance of the authors' implementation of decision list classifiers for abbreviations was better than that of traditional decision list classifiers. However, the opposite held for the other two sets. Also, the authors' mixed supervised learning was stable and generally better than others for all sets. CONCLUSION: From this study, it was found that different aspects of supervised WSD depend on each other. The experiment method presented in the study can be used to select the best supervised WSD classifier for each ambiguous term.
Virginia Teller, Carol Friedman
J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc.2
1994 A Probabilistic Algorithm for Segmenting Non-Kanji Japanese Strings
Virginia Teller, Eleanor Olds Batchelder
AAAI1
1981 The Framework for a Model of Psychoanalytic Inference
Virginia Teller, Hartvig Dahl
IJCAI1