Jump to content

Computational linguistics: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
rephrased
Undid revision 1262571567 by JA1907 (talk): material apparently already cited
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Since 2020s, near-synonym of natural language processing}}
{{Short description|Use of computational tools for the study of linguistics}}
{{About|the scientific field|the journal|Computational Linguistics (journal)}}
{{About|the scientific field|the journal|Computational Linguistics (journal)}}
{{Linguistics|Subfields2}}
{{Linguistics|Subfields2}}


'''Computational linguistics''' is an [[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]] field concerned with the [[computational modelling]] of [[natural language]], as well as the study of appropriate computational approaches to linguistic questions. In general, computational linguistics draws upon [[linguistics]], [[computer science]], [[artificial intelligence]], [[mathematics]], [[logic]], [[philosophy]], [[cognitive science]], [[cognitive psychology]], [[psycholinguistics]], [[anthropology]] and [[neuroscience]], among others.
'''Computational linguistics''' has since 2020s became a near-synonym of either [[natural language processing]] or [[language technology]], with [[deep learning]] approaches, such as [[large language model]]s, overperforming the specific approaches previously used in the field.{{Citation needed|date=August 2023}}


==Origins==
==Origins==
The field overlapped with [[artificial intelligence]] since the efforts in the United States in the 1950s to use computers to automatically translate texts from foreign languages, particularly Russian scientific journals, into English.<ref>John Hutchins: [http://www.hutchinsweb.me.uk/MTS-1999.pdf Retrospect and prospect in computer-based translation.] Proceedings of MT Summit VII, 1999, pp. 30–44.</ref> Since rule-based approaches were able to make [[arithmetic]] (systematic) calculations much faster and more accurately than humans, it was expected that [[lexicon]], [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], [[syntax]] and [[semantics]] can be learned using explicit rules, as well. After the [[AI winter|failure of rule-based approaches]], [[David G. Hays|David Hays]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://nlp.shef.ac.uk/iccl/committee.html#deceased|title=Deceased members|website=ICCL members|access-date=15 November 2017|ref=ICCLmembers|archive-date=17 May 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517235543/http://nlp.shef.ac.uk/iccl/committee.html#deceased|url-status=dead}}</ref> coined the term in order to distinguish the field from AI and co-founded both the [[Association for Computational Linguistics|Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL)]] and the [[International Committee on Computational Linguistics]] (ICCL) in the 1970s and 1980s. What started as an effort to translate between languages evolved into a much wider field of [[natural language processing]].<ref>[http://www-nlpir.nist.gov/MINDS/FINAL/NLP.web.pdf Natural Language Processing by Liz Liddy, Eduard Hovy, Jimmy Lin, John Prager, Dragomir Radev, Lucy Vanderwende, Ralph Weischedel]</ref>.<ref>Arnold B. Barach: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/bostworld/2152048032/in/set-72157603898383698/ Translating Machine] 1975: And the Changes To Come.</ref>
The field overlapped with [[artificial intelligence]] since the efforts in the United States in the 1950s to use computers to automatically translate texts from foreign languages, particularly Russian scientific journals, into English.<ref>John Hutchins: [http://www.hutchinsweb.me.uk/MTS-1999.pdf Retrospect and prospect in computer-based translation.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080414141215/http://www.hutchinsweb.me.uk/MTS-1999.pdf |date=2008-04-14 }} Proceedings of MT Summit VII, 1999, pp. 30–44.</ref> Since rule-based approaches were able to make [[arithmetic]] (systematic) calculations much faster and more accurately than humans, it was expected that [[lexicon]], [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], [[syntax]] and [[semantics]] can be learned using explicit rules, as well. After the [[AI winter|failure of rule-based approaches]], [[David G. Hays|David Hays]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://nlp.shef.ac.uk/iccl/committee.html#deceased|title=Deceased members|website=ICCL members|access-date=15 November 2017|ref=ICCLmembers|archive-date=17 May 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517235543/http://nlp.shef.ac.uk/iccl/committee.html#deceased|url-status=dead}}</ref> coined the term in order to distinguish the field from AI and co-founded both the [[Association for Computational Linguistics|Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL)]] and the [[International Committee on Computational Linguistics]] (ICCL) in the 1970s and 1980s. What started as an effort to translate between languages evolved into a much wider field of [[natural language processing]].<ref>[http://www-nlpir.nist.gov/MINDS/FINAL/NLP.web.pdf Natural Language Processing by Liz Liddy, Eduard Hovy, Jimmy Lin, John Prager, Dragomir Radev, Lucy Vanderwende, Ralph Weischedel]</ref><ref>Arnold B. Barach: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/bostworld/2152048032/in/set-72157603898383698/ Translating Machine] 1975: And the Changes To Come.</ref>


==Annotated corpora==
==Modelling language acquisition==
In order to be able to meticulously study the [[English language]], an annotated text corpus was much needed. The Penn [[Treebank]]<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Marcus, M.|author2=Marcinkiewicz, M.|name-list-style=amp|year=1993|url=https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J/J93/J93-2004.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J/J93/J93-2004.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank|journal=Computational Linguistics|volume=19|issue=2|pages=313–330}}</ref> was one of the most used corpora. It consisted of IBM computer manuals, transcribed telephone conversations, and other texts, together containing over 4.5 million words of American English, annotated using both [[part-of-speech]] tagging and syntactic bracketing.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Taylor|first1=Ann|title=Treebanks|date=2003|publisher=Spring Netherlands|pages=5–22|chapter=1}}</ref>


Japanese sentence corpora were analyzed and a pattern of [[log-normality]] was found in relation to sentence length.<ref name="autogenerated3">{{cite journal|author1=Furuhashi, S.|author2=Hayakawa, Y. |name-list-style=amp|year=2012|title=Lognormality of the Distribution of Japanese Sentence Lengths|journal=Journal of the Physical Society of Japan|volume=81|issue=3|page=034004|doi=10.1143/JPSJ.81.034004|bibcode=2012JPSJ...81c4004F }}</ref>

==Modeling language acquisition==
The fact that during [[language acquisition]], children are largely only exposed to positive evidence,<ref>Bowerman, M. (1988). [http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:468143:4/component/escidoc:532427/bowerman_1988_The-No.pdf The "no negative evidence" problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar. Explaining language universals].</ref> meaning that the only evidence for what is a correct form is provided, and no evidence for what is not correct,<ref name="autogenerated1971">Braine, M.D.S. (1971). On two types of models of the internalization of grammars. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.), The ontogenesis of grammar: A theoretical perspective. New York: Academic Press.</ref> was a limitation for the models at the time because the now available [[deep learning]] models were not available in late 1980s.<ref name="powers1989">Powers, D.M.W. & Turk, C.C.R. (1989). ''Machine Learning of Natural Language''. Springer-Verlag. {{ISBN|978-0-387-19557-5}}.</ref>
The fact that during [[language acquisition]], children are largely only exposed to positive evidence,<ref>Bowerman, M. (1988). [http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:468143:4/component/escidoc:532427/bowerman_1988_The-No.pdf The "no negative evidence" problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar. Explaining language universals].</ref> meaning that the only evidence for what is a correct form is provided, and no evidence for what is not correct,<ref name="autogenerated1971">Braine, M.D.S. (1971). On two types of models of the internalization of grammars. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.), The ontogenesis of grammar: A theoretical perspective. New York: Academic Press.</ref> was a limitation for the models at the time because the now available [[deep learning]] models were not available in late 1980s.<ref name="powers1989">Powers, D.M.W. & Turk, C.C.R. (1989). ''Machine Learning of Natural Language''. Springer-Verlag. {{ISBN|978-0-387-19557-5}}.</ref>


It has been shown that languages can be learned with a combination of simple input presented incrementally as the child develops better memory and longer attention span,<ref name="autogenerated1993">{{cite journal|title= Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small|journal= Cognition|volume= 48|issue= 1|pages= 71–99|doi= 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90058-4|pmid= 8403835|year= 1993|last1= Elman|first1= Jeffrey L.|s2cid= 2105042}}</ref> which explained the long period of [[language acquisition]] in human infants and children.<ref name="autogenerated1993"/>
It has been shown that languages can be learned with a combination of simple input presented incrementally as the child develops better memory and longer attention span,<ref name="autogenerated1993">{{cite journal|title= Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small|journal= Cognition|volume= 48|issue= 1|pages= 71–99|doi= 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90058-4|pmid= 8403835|year= 1993|last1= Elman|first1= Jeffrey L.|s2cid= 2105042|citeseerx= 10.1.1.135.4937}}</ref> which explained the long period of [[language acquisition]] in human infants and children.<ref name="autogenerated1993"/>


Robots have been used to test linguistic theories.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Salvi | first1 = G. | last2 = Montesano | first2 = L. | last3 = Bernardino | first3 = A. | last4 = Santos-Victor | first4 = J. | year = 2012 | title = Language bootstrapping: learning word meanings from the perception-action association | journal = IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics | volume = 42 | issue = 3| pages = 660–71 | doi = 10.1109/TSMCB.2011.2172420 | pmid = 22106152 | arxiv = 1711.09714 | s2cid = 977486 }}</ref> Enabled to learn as children might, models were created based on an [[affordance]] model in which mappings between actions, perceptions, and effects were created and linked to spoken words. Crucially, these robots were able to acquire functioning word-to-meaning mappings without needing grammatical structure.
Robots have been used to test linguistic theories.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Salvi | first1 = G. | last2 = Montesano | first2 = L. | last3 = Bernardino | first3 = A. | last4 = Santos-Victor | first4 = J. | year = 2012 | title = Language bootstrapping: learning word meanings from the perception-action association | journal = IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics | volume = 42 | issue = 3| pages = 660–71 | doi = 10.1109/TSMCB.2011.2172420 | pmid = 22106152 | arxiv = 1711.09714 | s2cid = 977486 }}</ref> Enabled to learn as children might, models were created based on an [[affordance]] model in which mappings between actions, perceptions, and effects were created and linked to spoken words. Crucially, these robots were able to acquire functioning word-to-meaning mappings without needing grammatical structure.


Using the [[Price equation]] and [[Pólya urn]] dynamics, researchers have created a system which not only predicts future linguistic evolution but also gives insight into the evolutionary history of modern-day languages.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Gong, T.|author2=Shuai, L.|author3=Tamariz, M.|author4=Jäger, G.|name-list-style=amp|year=2012|title=Studying Language Change Using Price Equation and Pólya-urn Dynamics|editor=E. Scalas|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=7|issue=3|page=e33171|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0033171|pmid=22427981|pmc=3299756|bibcode=2012PLoSO...733171G|doi-access=free}}</ref>
Using the [[Price equation]] and [[Pólya urn]] dynamics, researchers have created a system which not only predicts future linguistic evolution but also gives insight into the evolutionary history of modern-day languages.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Gong, T.|author2=Shuai, L.|author3=Tamariz, M.|author4=Jäger, G.|name-list-style=amp|year=2012|title=Studying Language Change Using Price Equation and Pólya-urn Dynamics|editor=E. Scalas|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=7|issue=3|page=e33171|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0033171|pmid=22427981|pmc=3299756|bibcode=2012PLoSO...733171G|doi-access=free}}</ref>

==Annotated corpora==

In order to be able to meticulously study the [[English language]], an annotated text corpus was much needed. The Penn [[Treebank]]<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Marcus, M.|author2=Marcinkiewicz, M.|name-list-style=amp|year=1993|url=https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J/J93/J93-2004.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J/J93/J93-2004.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank|journal=Computational Linguistics|volume=19|issue=2|pages=313–330}}</ref> was one of the most used corpora. It consisted of IBM computer manuals, transcribed telephone conversations, and other texts, together containing over 4.5 million words of American English, annotated using both [[part-of-speech]] tagging and syntactic bracketing.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Taylor|first1=Ann|title=Treebanks|date=2003|publisher=Spring Netherlands|pages=5–22|chapter=1}}</ref>

Using computational methods, Japanese sentence corpora were analyzed and a pattern of [[log-normality]] was found in relation to sentence length.<ref name="autogenerated3">{{cite journal|author1=Furuhashi, S.|author2=Hayakawa, Y. |name-list-style=amp|year=2012|title=Lognormality of the Distribution of Japanese Sentence Lengths|journal=Journal of the Physical Society of Japan|volume=81|issue=3|page=034004|doi=10.1143/JPSJ.81.034004|bibcode=2012JPSJ...81c4004F }}</ref>


==Chomsky's theories==
==Chomsky's theories==
Chomsky's theories have influenced computational linguistics, particularly in understanding how infants learn complex grammatical structures, such as those described in [[Chomsky normal form]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Yogita |first1=Bansal |title=Insight to Computational Linguistics |url=https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/50283410/ijeter034102016-libre.pdf?1479039496=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DInsight_to_Computational_Linguistics.pdf&Expires=1727013507&Signature=OpBNq-Ocozu3StViVzaoeet1B7yVJUvnnLUxYpQKaTUr71Cho6YFoTZPv2k6ZzXtkxuZ3ViZNDJp~t5nLAyLxLk0mxGR6oVMQK4Rk68RaaCZVebBMvFMqKyRHGhwpbFLMbibo5eD7MHZQBPAxDwjBDGtX0TjORdrQ2XUCLw~vM7AtWsP3wtTj-TeHXSfQiL8DiyuvjEZEoqQ1NGhE2S1po~kTs5Eov-WFvYrfm4McdL~ztLUTdUmHyd3ntg0zI9pNPZG7CtouiHWtEA26fXOZEbD5Qv9C1~gnV8VTSLzxWSMwEe3od6vPKoW1jlngnLLK9VoldGapnaUjJtWtW2MKw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA |publisher=International Journal 4.10 |access-date=September 22, 2024 |page=94 |date=2016}}</ref> Attempts have been made to determine how an infant learns a "non-normal grammar" as theorized by Chomsky normal form.<ref name="autogenerated1971"/> Research in this area combines structural approaches with computational models to analyze large [[Corpus linguistics|linguistic corpora]] like the Penn [[Treebank]], helping to uncover patterns in language acquisition.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Yogita |first1=Bansal |title=Insight to Computational Linguistics |url=https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/50283410/ijeter034102016-libre.pdf?1479039496=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DInsight_to_Computational_Linguistics.pdf&Expires=1727013507&Signature=OpBNq-Ocozu3StViVzaoeet1B7yVJUvnnLUxYpQKaTUr71Cho6YFoTZPv2k6ZzXtkxuZ3ViZNDJp~t5nLAyLxLk0mxGR6oVMQK4Rk68RaaCZVebBMvFMqKyRHGhwpbFLMbibo5eD7MHZQBPAxDwjBDGtX0TjORdrQ2XUCLw~vM7AtWsP3wtTj-TeHXSfQiL8DiyuvjEZEoqQ1NGhE2S1po~kTs5Eov-WFvYrfm4McdL~ztLUTdUmHyd3ntg0zI9pNPZG7CtouiHWtEA26fXOZEbD5Qv9C1~gnV8VTSLzxWSMwEe3od6vPKoW1jlngnLLK9VoldGapnaUjJtWtW2MKw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA |publisher=International Journal 4.10 |access-date=September 22, 2024 |page=94 |date=2016}}</ref>
Attempts have been made to find out how does an infant learn a "non-normal grammar" as theorized by [[Chomsky normal form]] without learning an "overgeneralized version" and "getting stuck".<ref name="autogenerated1971"/>


==See also==
==See also==
Line 74: Line 72:
** [http://www.aclweb.org/anthology ACL Anthology of research papers]
** [http://www.aclweb.org/anthology ACL Anthology of research papers]
** [http://aclweb.org/aclwiki/ ACL Wiki for Computational Linguistics]
** [http://aclweb.org/aclwiki/ ACL Wiki for Computational Linguistics]
* [http://www.CICLing.org/ CICLing annual conferences on Computational Linguistics]
* [http://www.CICLing.org/ CICLing annual conferences on Computational Linguistics] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190206002457/http://www.cicling.org/ |date=2019-02-06 }}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20110122142133/http://www.cla.imcsit.org/ Computational Linguistics&nbsp;– Applications workshop]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20110122142133/http://www.cla.imcsit.org/ Computational Linguistics&nbsp;– Applications workshop]
* {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080125103030/http://www.gelbukh.com/clbook/ |date=January 25, 2008 |title=Free online introductory book on Computational Linguistics }}
* {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080125103030/http://www.gelbukh.com/clbook/ |date=January 25, 2008 |title=Free online introductory book on Computational Linguistics }}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20180212202132/http://www.lt-world.org/ Language Technology World]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20180212202132/http://www.lt-world.org/ Language Technology World]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20191025033136/http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~gabr/resources/resources.html Resources for Text, Speech and Language Processing]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20191025033136/http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~gabr/resources/resources.html Resources for Text, Speech and Language Processing]
* [http://clg.wlv.ac.uk/ The Research Group in Computational Linguistics]
* [http://clg.wlv.ac.uk/ The Research Group in Computational Linguistics] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130801110817/http://clg.wlv.ac.uk/ |date=2013-08-01 }}


{{Computer science}}
{{Computer science}}

Latest revision as of 02:25, 12 December 2024

Computational linguistics is an interdisciplinary field concerned with the computational modelling of natural language, as well as the study of appropriate computational approaches to linguistic questions. In general, computational linguistics draws upon linguistics, computer science, artificial intelligence, mathematics, logic, philosophy, cognitive science, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics, anthropology and neuroscience, among others.

Origins

[edit]

The field overlapped with artificial intelligence since the efforts in the United States in the 1950s to use computers to automatically translate texts from foreign languages, particularly Russian scientific journals, into English.[1] Since rule-based approaches were able to make arithmetic (systematic) calculations much faster and more accurately than humans, it was expected that lexicon, morphology, syntax and semantics can be learned using explicit rules, as well. After the failure of rule-based approaches, David Hays[2] coined the term in order to distinguish the field from AI and co-founded both the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) and the International Committee on Computational Linguistics (ICCL) in the 1970s and 1980s. What started as an effort to translate between languages evolved into a much wider field of natural language processing.[3][4]

Annotated corpora

[edit]

In order to be able to meticulously study the English language, an annotated text corpus was much needed. The Penn Treebank[5] was one of the most used corpora. It consisted of IBM computer manuals, transcribed telephone conversations, and other texts, together containing over 4.5 million words of American English, annotated using both part-of-speech tagging and syntactic bracketing.[6]

Japanese sentence corpora were analyzed and a pattern of log-normality was found in relation to sentence length.[7]

Modeling language acquisition

[edit]

The fact that during language acquisition, children are largely only exposed to positive evidence,[8] meaning that the only evidence for what is a correct form is provided, and no evidence for what is not correct,[9] was a limitation for the models at the time because the now available deep learning models were not available in late 1980s.[10]

It has been shown that languages can be learned with a combination of simple input presented incrementally as the child develops better memory and longer attention span,[11] which explained the long period of language acquisition in human infants and children.[11]

Robots have been used to test linguistic theories.[12] Enabled to learn as children might, models were created based on an affordance model in which mappings between actions, perceptions, and effects were created and linked to spoken words. Crucially, these robots were able to acquire functioning word-to-meaning mappings without needing grammatical structure.

Using the Price equation and Pólya urn dynamics, researchers have created a system which not only predicts future linguistic evolution but also gives insight into the evolutionary history of modern-day languages.[13]

Chomsky's theories

[edit]

Chomsky's theories have influenced computational linguistics, particularly in understanding how infants learn complex grammatical structures, such as those described in Chomsky normal form.[14] Attempts have been made to determine how an infant learns a "non-normal grammar" as theorized by Chomsky normal form.[9] Research in this area combines structural approaches with computational models to analyze large linguistic corpora like the Penn Treebank, helping to uncover patterns in language acquisition.[15]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ John Hutchins: Retrospect and prospect in computer-based translation. Archived 2008-04-14 at the Wayback Machine Proceedings of MT Summit VII, 1999, pp. 30–44.
  2. ^ "Deceased members". ICCL members. Archived from the original on 17 May 2017. Retrieved 15 November 2017.
  3. ^ Natural Language Processing by Liz Liddy, Eduard Hovy, Jimmy Lin, John Prager, Dragomir Radev, Lucy Vanderwende, Ralph Weischedel
  4. ^ Arnold B. Barach: Translating Machine 1975: And the Changes To Come.
  5. ^ Marcus, M. & Marcinkiewicz, M. (1993). "Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank" (PDF). Computational Linguistics. 19 (2): 313–330. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
  6. ^ Taylor, Ann (2003). "1". Treebanks. Spring Netherlands. pp. 5–22.
  7. ^ Furuhashi, S. & Hayakawa, Y. (2012). "Lognormality of the Distribution of Japanese Sentence Lengths". Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. 81 (3): 034004. Bibcode:2012JPSJ...81c4004F. doi:10.1143/JPSJ.81.034004.
  8. ^ Bowerman, M. (1988). The "no negative evidence" problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar. Explaining language universals.
  9. ^ a b Braine, M.D.S. (1971). On two types of models of the internalization of grammars. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.), The ontogenesis of grammar: A theoretical perspective. New York: Academic Press.
  10. ^ Powers, D.M.W. & Turk, C.C.R. (1989). Machine Learning of Natural Language. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-0-387-19557-5.
  11. ^ a b Elman, Jeffrey L. (1993). "Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small". Cognition. 48 (1): 71–99. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.135.4937. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90058-4. PMID 8403835. S2CID 2105042.
  12. ^ Salvi, G.; Montesano, L.; Bernardino, A.; Santos-Victor, J. (2012). "Language bootstrapping: learning word meanings from the perception-action association". IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics. 42 (3): 660–71. arXiv:1711.09714. doi:10.1109/TSMCB.2011.2172420. PMID 22106152. S2CID 977486.
  13. ^ Gong, T.; Shuai, L.; Tamariz, M. & Jäger, G. (2012). E. Scalas (ed.). "Studying Language Change Using Price Equation and Pólya-urn Dynamics". PLOS ONE. 7 (3): e33171. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...733171G. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033171. PMC 3299756. PMID 22427981.
  14. ^ Yogita, Bansal (2016). "Insight to Computational Linguistics" (PDF). International Journal 4.10. p. 94. Retrieved September 22, 2024.
  15. ^ Yogita, Bansal (2016). "Insight to Computational Linguistics" (PDF). International Journal 4.10. p. 94. Retrieved September 22, 2024.

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]