Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing 2021
DOI: 10.1145/3412841.3442093
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Heterogeneous document embeddings for cross-lingual text classification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another issue is the development of community question answering systems for low-resource languages, such as Arabic and Semitic languages, which have in general lower performances than systems developed for rich-resource languages such as English and Chinese. Cross-lingual text classification and retrieval methods exploiting correlations on distinct language-dependent feature spaces can be a promising research direction to design more effective systems in different languages [115]. Not forgetting the contributions to the field of NLP by leading search engine companies such as Google (just think at the language models based on BERT).…”
Section: Emerging Flexible Query Answering Topicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another issue is the development of community question answering systems for low-resource languages, such as Arabic and Semitic languages, which have in general lower performances than systems developed for rich-resource languages such as English and Chinese. Cross-lingual text classification and retrieval methods exploiting correlations on distinct language-dependent feature spaces can be a promising research direction to design more effective systems in different languages [115]. Not forgetting the contributions to the field of NLP by leading search engine companies such as Google (just think at the language models based on BERT).…”
Section: Emerging Flexible Query Answering Topicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an earlier, shorter version of this paper[45] we report different results for the very same datasets. The reason of the difference is that in[45] we use concatenation as the aggregation policy while we here use averaging.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an earlier, shorter version of this paper[45] we report different results for the very same datasets. The reason of the difference is that in[45] we use concatenation as the aggregation policy while we here use averaging.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%