To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This book marries social work and artificial intelligence to provide an introductory guide for using AI for social good. Following an introductory chapter laying out approaches and ethical principles of using AI for social work interventions, the book describes in detail an intervention to increase the spread of HIV information by using algorithms to determine the key individuals in a social network of homeless youth. Other chapters present interdisciplinary collaborations between AI and social work students, including a chatbot for sexual health information and algorithms to determine who is at higher stress among persons with Type 2 Diabetes. For students, academic researchers, industry leaders, and practitioners, these real-life examples from the USC Center for Artificial Intelligence in Society demonstrate how social work and artificial intelligence can be used in tandem for the greater good.
By increasing the amount of data in computer networks, searching and finding suitable information will be harder for users. One of the most widespread forms of information on such networks are textual documents. So exploring these documents to get information about their content is difficult and sometimes impossible. Multi-document text summarization systems are an aid to producing a summary with a fixed and predefined length, while covering the maximum content of the input documents. This paper presents a novel method for multi-document extractive summarization based on textual entailment relations and sentence compression via formulating the problem as a knapsack problem. In this approach, sentences of documents are ranked according to the extended Tf-Idf method, then entailment scores of selected sentences are computed. Through these scores, the final score of each sentence is calculated. Finally, by decreasing the lengths of sentences via sentence compression, the problem has been solved by greedy and dynamic Programming approaches to the knapsack problem. Experiments on standard summarization datasets and evaluating the results based on the Rouge system show that the suggested method, according to the best of our knowledge, has increased F-measure of query-based summarization systems by two per cent and F-measure of general summarization systems by five per cent.
This article presents a new method to automatically simplify English sentences. The approach is designed to reduce the number of compound clauses and nominally bound relative clauses in input sentences. The article provides an overview of a corpus annotated with information about various explicit signs of syntactic complexity and describes the two major components of a sentence simplification method that works by exploiting information on the signs occurring in the sentences of a text. The first component is a sign tagger which automatically classifies signs in accordance with the annotation scheme used to annotate the corpus. The second component is an iterative rule-based sentence transformation tool. Exploiting the sign tagger in conjunction with other NLP components, the sentence transformation tool automatically rewrites long sentences containing compound clauses and nominally bound relative clauses as sequences of shorter single-clause sentences. Evaluation of the different components reveals acceptable performance in rewriting sentences containing compound clauses but less accuracy when rewriting sentences containing nominally bound relative clauses. A detailed error analysis revealed that the major sources of error include inaccurate sign tagging, the relatively limited coverage of the rules used to rewrite sentences, and an inability to discriminate between various subtypes of clause coordination. Despite this, the system performed well in comparison with two baselines. This finding was reinforced by automatic estimations of the readability of system output and by surveys of readers’ opinions about the accuracy, accessibility, and meaning of this output.
Research on topic segmentation has recently focused on segmenting documents by taking advantage of documents covering the same topics. In order to properly evaluate such approaches, a dataset of related documents is needed. However, existing datasets are limited in the number of related documents per domain. In addition, most of the available datasets do not consider documents from different media sources (PowerPoints, videos, etc.), which pose specific challenges to segmentation. We fill this gap with the MUltimedia SEgmentation Dataset (MUSED), a collection of documents manually segmented, from different media sources, in seven different domains, with an average of twenty related documents per domain. In this paper, we describe the process of building MUSED. A multi-annotator study is carried out to determine if it is possible to observe agreement among human judges and characterize their disagreement patterns. In addition, we use MUSED to compare the state-of-the-art topic segmentation techniques, including the ones that take advantage of related documents. Moreover, we study the impact of having documents from different media sources in the dataset. To the best of our knowledge, MUSED is the first dataset that allows a straightforward evaluation of both single- and multiple-documents topic segmentation techniques, as well as to study how these behave in the presence of documents from different media sources. Results show that some techniques are, indeed, sensitive to different media sources, and also that current multi-document segmentation models do not outperform previous models, pointing to a research line that needs to be boosted.
Lots of companies are offering lots of APIs. Reviews are not always as constructive as they could be. Some reviews encourage unproductive work on checkbox features that no one wants. It makes no sense to do the wrong thing badly. Constructive reviews should help focus priorities on what matters. Users care more about a great box opening experience than small improvements in word error rate and BLEU, popular metrics for speech and translation. In 15 minutes or less, can we teach potential users something new (and fun) that does something useful, such as how to translate PowerPoint between English and Chinese, preserving many of the features that are important to PowerPoint such as graphics and animations? See Appendix for the solution.
Our passion to continually improve the journal and, as a result, our contribution to the community drives our quest for highly diversified and up-to-date content. We are launching a new category of papers, i.e., ‘keynote’ or ‘invited’ papers, which will be penned by leading lights in the field.