Austin Matthews


2019

Recurrent neural network grammars generate sentences using phrase-structure syntax and perform very well on both parsing and language modeling. To explore whether generative dependency models are similarly effective, we propose two new generative models of dependency syntax. Both models use recurrent neural nets to avoid making explicit independence assumptions, but they differ in the order used to construct the trees: one builds the tree bottom-up and the other top-down, which profoundly changes the estimation problem faced by the learner. We evaluate the two models on three typologically different languages: English, Arabic, and Japanese. While both generative models improve parsing performance over a discriminative baseline, they are significantly less effective than non-syntactic LSTM language models. Surprisingly, little difference between the construction orders is observed for either parsing or language modeling.

2018

Languages with productive morphology pose problems for language models that generate words from a fixed vocabulary. Although character-based models allow any possible word type to be generated, they are linguistically naïve: they must discover that words exist and are delimited by spaces—basic linguistic facts that are built in to the structure of word-based models. We introduce an open-vocabulary language model that incorporates more sophisticated linguistic knowledge by predicting words using a mixture of three generative processes: (1) by generating words as a sequence of characters, (2) by directly generating full word forms, and (3) by generating words as a sequence of morphemes that are combined using a hand-written morphological analyzer. Experiments on Finnish, Turkish, and Russian show that our model outperforms character sequence models and other strong baselines on intrinsic and extrinsic measures. Furthermore, we show that our model learns to exploit morphological knowledge encoded in the analyzer, and, as a byproduct, it can perform effective unsupervised morphological disambiguation.

2016

2015

2014

2013