• No results found

Measuring Similarity from Word Pair Matrices with Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic Associations

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "Measuring Similarity from Word Pair Matrices with Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic Associations"

Copied!
10
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

Loading

Figure

Table 1: An example annotated by the word clustering method.
Table 3: Computation of ffor a given word pair “fish:fins” with Table 1.
Table 7: The MaxDiff scores for each category.
Table 9: The evaluations comparing with other methods.

References

Related documents

The DNA damage response (DDR) gene cell cycle checkpoint kinase 2 (Chk2) triggers programmed cell death and lethal radiation-induced toxicity in mice in vivo.. However, it is not

Under agarose migration assays were performed, and the potent chemotactic ligand to FPR1 (fMLP) was used as a chemoattractant to further determine whether LPS promoted FPR1-

Major assets of our approach are the matched long rRNA- depleted RNA and complete small RNA sequencing data, thus interrogating the complete transcriptome, of microenvironment-free

Thus, gill and brain possessed 1.9- and 1.5-fold, respectively, more Mb protein than liver, but all non-muscle tissues, including gill, liver and kidney, expressed very small amounts

Protein level of TBK1 and phosphorylated TBK-1 (p-TBK1) were analyzed using western blotting in murine BMDMs transfected with siCon or siAIM2 and then infected 24h with M.bovis

In the present study, honeybees were provided with differential conditioning to images of complex natural scenes, in order to determine if they could reliably learn to

Although species differ in t capture , a significant effect of ram distance on attack velocity for guppy prey (r 2 =0.76, P=0.011) is caused by variation in ram distance (for

i we recall the factorization of an IFR established by Dimitrov 18 ; ii we notice some similarities between that factorization and those established earlier on FRs by Dutta 3