search

UUDigitalHumanitieslab / placenamedisambiguation

A pipeline of scripts that enables disambiguation of place names in a given corpus
MIT License
0 stars 0 forks source link

Run test with enhanced SpaCy #31

Open alexhebing opened 5 years ago

alexhebing commented 5 years ago

After DH2019 and a meeting before that with Marijn Schraagen, I have the idea that a multiNER might not be the best solution for collecting as many locations from a(ny) historical corpus. Instead, I think, it might be a better idea to enhance one NER system with a list of placenames, preferably historical and multilingual, so that the chances of finding placenames are significantly increased. In light of this project, all other entities are ignored anyway.

Do a brief proof of concept with SpaCy, enhanced with both these Dutch historical placenames and relevant bits of Geonames. Find entities and compare with either the Italian or Dutch Golden Standard (or both) using evaluate.py.

alexhebing commented 5 years ago

I ran Spacy with two sets from the Geonames database: 1) with the featureclasses P, L, and A (see the README at the bottom of this page; 2) with only P. In both cases I extracted the regular (i.e. English) place name and its alternate Italian name. For 1) this resulted in 271432 toponyms, and for 2) 162317. These list were added to Spacy in three ways: a) as patterns in the EntityRuler before the ner pipeline; b) as patterns in the EntityRuler after the ner pipeline; and c) as plain strings to match using a PhraseMatcher.

Results, however, were very disappointing. Giving only the scores for LOC, here is Spacy without any toponyms added:

SpaCy config precision recall f1-score
None 0.399 0.644 0.441

And with the various modifications:

SpaCy config precision recall f1-score
a1 0.264 0.740 0.356
a2 0.307 0.654 0.384
b1 0.263 0.734 0.354
b2 x x x
c1 0.337 0.651 0.406
c2 0.335 0.651 0.405

Note that b2 was never run, because of pure disappointment on the developers' side. Perhaps I was expecting too much?

Anyhow, this does not seem the way to go for now, although I am still tempted by the method, and investigating further why this doesn't work as well as expected (e.g. what kinds of placenames are missed, which words are said to be LOC when they aren't, what can be done to improve this?).