Don’t Neglect the Obvious:On the Role of Unambiguous Words in Word Sense Disambiguation
Table 2: F1 performance on the WSD evaluation framework of raganato-etal-2017-word. All corpora marked are concatenated with SemCor (SC). SOTAs reported for reference but not directly comparable due to use of definitions (‡) or not using a 1NN approach (†). All reported SOTAs are based on BERT trained on SC. Results in datasets that were used as development are marked with *.
['[EMPTY]', '[BOLD] Corpus', '[BOLD] SE-2', '[BOLD] SE-3', '[BOLD] SE07', '[BOLD] SE13', '[BOLD] SE15', '[BOLD] ALL']
In the table we include UWA with two different maximum number of examples per unambiguous word, i.e., 1 and 10. For comparison, we also include the results of EWISE Kumar et al. As can be observed, the concatenation of our UWA corpus and SemCor provides the best overall results, regardless of the number of examples cut-off. Perhaps surprisingly, our corpus is the only one that provides improvements over the baseline (SemCor-only).