Youssef Miloudi
2022
BL.Research at SemEval-2022 Task 1: Deep networks for Reverse Dictionary using embeddings and LSTM autoencoders
Nihed Bendahman
|
Julien Breton
|
Lina Nicolaieff
|
Mokhtar Boumedyen Billami
|
Christophe Bortolaso
|
Youssef Miloudi
Proceedings of the 16th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval-2022)
This paper describes our two deep learning systems that competed at SemEval-2022 Task 1 “CODWOE: Comparing Dictionaries and WOrd Embeddings”. We participated in the subtask for the reverse dictionary which consists in generating vectors from glosses. We use sequential models that integrate several neural networks, starting from Embeddings networks until the use of Dense networks, Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (BiLSTM) networks and LSTM networks. All glosses have been preprocessed in order to consider the best representation form of the meanings for all words that appears. We achieved very competitive results in reverse dictionary with a second position in English and French languages when using contextualized embeddings, and the same position for English, French and Spanish languages when using char embeddings.
BL.Research at SemEval-2022 Task 8: Using various Semantic Information to evaluate document-level Semantic Textual Similarity
Sebastien Dufour
|
Mohamed Mehdi Kandi
|
Karim Boutamine
|
Camille Gosse
|
Mokhtar Boumedyen Billami
|
Christophe Bortolaso
|
Youssef Miloudi
Proceedings of the 16th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval-2022)
This paper presents our system for document-level semantic textual similarity (STS) evaluation at SemEval-2022 Task 8: “Multilingual News Article Similarity”. The semantic information used is obtained by using different semantic models ranging from the extraction of key terms and named entities to the document classification and obtaining similarity from automatic summarization of documents. All these semantic information’s are then used as features to feed a supervised system in order to evaluate the degree of similarity of a pair of documents. We obtained a Pearson correlation score of 0.706 compared to the best score of 0.818 from teams that participated in this task.
Search