The ancestor of Chinese character – the ancient characters from about 1300 BC to 200 BC are not fixed in their writing glyphs. At the same or different points in time, one character can possess multiple glyphs that are different in shapes or radicals. Nearly half of ancient glyphs have not been deciphered yet. This paper proposes an innovative task of ancient Chinese glyph identification, which aims at inferring the Chinese character label for the unknown ancient Chinese glyphs which are not in the training set based on the image and radical information. Specifically, we construct a Chinese glyph knowledge graph (CGKG) associating glyphs in different historical periods according to the radical semantics, and propose a multimodal Chinese glyph identification framework (MCGI) fusing the visual, textual, and the graph data. The experiment is designed on a real Chinese glyph dataset spanning over 1000 years, it demonstrates the effectiveness of our method, and reports the potentials of each modality on this task. It provides a preliminary reference for the automatic ancient Chinese character deciphering at the glyph level.

Modern Chinese characters evolved from 3,000 years ago. Up to now, tens of thousands of glyphs of ancient characters have been discovered, which must be deciphered by experts to interpret unearthed documents. Experts usually need to compare each ancient character to be examined with similar known ones in whole historical periods. However, it is inevitably limited by human memory and experience, which often cost a lot of time but associations are limited to a small scope. To help researchers discover glyph similar characters, this paper introduces ZiNet, the first diachronic knowledge base describing relationships and evolution of Chinese characters and words. In addition, powered by the knowledge of radical systems in ZiNet, this paper introduces glyph similarity measurement between ancient Chinese characters, which could capture similar glyph pairs that are potentially related in origins or semantics. Results show strong positive correlations between scores from the method and from human experts. Finally, qualitative analysis and implicit future applications are presented.