<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Distributed Representation in Information Retrieval - AMRITA_CEN_NLP@IRLeD 2017</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Barathi Ganesh HB</string-name>
          <email>barathiganesh.hb@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Reshma U</string-name>
          <email>reshma.anata@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Anand Kumar M</string-name>
          <email>m_anandkumar@cb.amrita.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Soman KP</string-name>
          <email>soman_kp@amrita.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Center for Computational Engineering and Networking Amrita University Coimbatore</institution>
          ,
          <country country="IN">India</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Information Extraction, Information Retrieval</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Text Representation, Distributed Representation, Legal Documents, Catchphrase Extraction, Doc2Vec</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>In this contemporary research era, the science of retrieving required information from the stored database is extending its applications in the legal and life science domains. With the exponential growth of the digital data available in the legal domain as an electronic media, there is a great demand for eficient and efective ways to retrieve required information from the stored document collection. This paper details our experimented approach in Information Retrieval from Legal Documents (IRLeD 2017) task. The task includes two subtasks, where the subtask 1 deals with information extraction and the subtask 2 deals with document retrieval. Text representation being a core component in any of the text analytics solution, we have experimented on the provided dataset to observe the performance of distributed representation of text in the Information Retrieval task. The distributed representation of text attained 3rd position in subtask 1 and attained satisfactory score in subtask 2.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>CCS CONCEPTS</title>
      <p>• Information systems → Information retrieval; •
Computing methodologies → Natural language processing;</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        The success of Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and the
availability of digital documents in legal domain, enforces the researchers
to automate the process involved in legal domain. Among these
processes Information Retrieval (IR) is a fundamental process [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ],
where in legal domain it helps in retrieving the prior cases related
to the current cases (precedence retrieval) and it can act as a
supporting reference to the legal practitioners [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        In legal documents, more than the functional words (commonly
used uninformative words), the frequency of the content words
(domain dependent informative words) are high. The complex
structure of these legal documents reduces the efectiveness of the
representation as well as retrieval. Thus, by storing these documents
with the meta data instead of the raw data will enhance the
performance of the retrieval process. One such meta data are the
catchphrases (list of legal terms) and these can be extracted through the
Information Extraction (IE) task [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        As told earlier this shared task involves two subtasks. The
subtask 1 deals with the catch phrase extraction from the legal
documents and subtask 2 deals with retrieval of documents related to
the current case document from the prior case documents. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Text representation is a principal component in any of the text
analytics problem. This has the direct proportion with the
performance of the system. Most of the current systems in the retrieval
process follows the frequency based representation methods [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
This is inefective, when we need to retrieve the documents with
respect its context. Representation of the context of the document is
inefective in the count based representation methods (Document
- Term Matrix and Term Frequency - Inverse Document Frequency
Matrix) and Distributional Representation methods (Count based
representation followed by the Matrix Factorization) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The cons stated above helped us to observe the performance
of distributed representation in IR and IE. Here document to
vector (doc2vec) is used to get the distributed representation of the
documents and the phrases. For this experiment the data set has
been provided by the Information Extraction for Legal Documents
(IRLeD) shared task organizers1. On successive representation, we
have utilized cosine distance for ranking the retrieved documents
as well as extracted phrases. The remaining part of the paper
discusses the distributed representation in Section 2 and the
experiments, observations are detailed in Section 3.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>DISTRIBUTED REPRESENTATION</title>
      <p>
        Though the Count based methods and Distributional
Representation methods has ability to include the word’s context through
ngrams, it sufers from the selection of n-gram phrases, sparsity and
curse of dimensionality [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. To overcome the above stated cons,
distributed representation is used to compute the fixed size dense
vector representation of texts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. This representation method has
the capability of representing the context of the text with
variablelength into fixed size dense vector. The dimension of the vector is
dynamic and typically its value ranges from hundred to thousand.
      </p>
      <p>
        Word to Vectors (Word2Vec) is a framework for learning word
vectors and it is shown in Fig 1a. The architecture is similar to the
Auto Encoder, where input is the one hot encoded context words
and output is one hot encoded target word to be predicted. The
intermediate learning weights, maps context to the target to be
predicted [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. In Fig. 1a, the context of three words is mapped to
1https://sites.google.com/view/fire2017irled/track-description?authuser=0
(a) Learning word vectors
(b) Learning phrase/document vectors
predict the fourth word by learning the matrix W. The column
vectors in the matrix W is known as word embedding (dense word
vectors).
      </p>
      <p>
        Doc2Vec is a frame work for learning documents or sentence
vectors and it is shown in Fig. 1b. The architecture is similar to
the Word2Vec architecture shown in Fig. 1a. The only change is
introducing a matrix D along with the matrix W to map the context
words to the target words to be predicted [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Here concatenation
or average of column vectors from D and W will be used to predict
the target word. In Word2Vec the word itself act as the symbol
to retrieve the corresponding vectors from the matrix W but in
Doc2Vec a symbolic label will be assigned to each documents for
the retrieval the corresponding vectors from the matrix D.
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>EXPERIMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS</title>
      <p>
        Dataset for both the subtasks are provided by the Information
Retrieval for Legal Documents (IRLeD) shared task organizers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ]. In
subtask 1, we were provided with the 100 legal case document and
its corresponding catch phrases for training. The objective is to
extract catch phrases for 300 test documents and ranking them with
respect to its relevance with the corresponding documents. The
given training and test documents (400) are represented as vectors
using Doc2Vec as explained in Section 2. In both the subtasks we
have utilized Distributed Memory model for computing the
document vectors. The file name of the documents are taken as the label
for the documents. Similar to the documents, each catch phrase in
the training documents are considered as the document itself and
represented as a vector by assigning unique label. There is totally
98 unique catch phrases available in the given training set. This
can be represented as,
d = fd_1; d_2; :::; d_400g
D = doc2vec (fD_1; D_2; :::; D_400g)
      </p>
      <p>c = fc_1; c_2; :::; c_98g</p>
      <p>C = doc2vec (fC_1; C_2; :::; C_98g)
In above equation D represents the document matrix, C represents
the Catch Phrase Matrix, D_i represents the document vector and
C_i represents the catch phrase vectors. On successive
representation, we have computed the cosine distance between the catch
phrase vector and the document vectors. Based on this cosine
distances we have ranked the catch phrase for making final
submission. The results are shown in following Table 1. For few of the
application the basic count based methods performs better than
the advanced representation methods. In order to observe the
performance we experimented the same approach with the document
- term matrix also.</p>
      <p>In subtask2, the objective is to retrieve the relevant documents
from the prior case documents by taking current documents as the
query. We have been provided with the 2000 prior case documents
and 200 current case documents. Both the documents sets are
represented as a matrix through Doc2vec. This can be represented as,
prior = {p_1; p_2; :::; p_2000}
Prior = doc2vec (fP _1; P _2; :::; P _2000g)</p>
      <p>current = fc_1; c_2; :::; c_200g</p>
      <p>Current = doc2vec (fC_1; C_2; :::; C_200g)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
the prior document vector and C_i represents the current
document vector. Similar to the subtask 1, here also cosine distance
between the current and prior document vectors are measured and
ranked. We have used cosine distance from python scipy pacakge2.
The measured cosine distance given below,
distance = 1</p>
      <p>u v
∥u ∥2 ∥v ∥2</p>
      <p>In order to compare the diferent representation methods, we
have experimented the same approach using Term Frequency -
Inverse Document Frequency Matrix and Document - Term Matrix
followed by a Singular value Decomposition. While computing SVD
the reduced dimension is 200. The obtained results are shown in
following Table 2.
(9)</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Mean Average</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Precision</title>
        <p>0.0058</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>Recall</title>
        <p>@100
0.058</p>
        <p>The Document - Term Matrix, Term Frequency - Inverse
Document Frequency Matrix and Singular value Decomposition are
computed using Scikit Learn python library3. The Doc2Vec is
computed using Gensim python library4. In both the tasks Doc2Vec is
computed using the parameters - dimension = 50, minimumcount =
1, windowsize = 5, model = distributedmemory. The recall should
be higher for the real time application. In subtask 1, though the
system attains less precision, it is able to attain the highest accuracy
comparing other participated system.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>4 CONCLUSIONS</title>
      <p>The documents and the phrases provided by the organizers are
represented as a matrix using distributed representation method. In
subtask 1, n-grams are extracted and its relevance with the
documents is measured using cosine distance. Similarly, in subtask 2 the
relevance between current and prior documents are ranked based
on the cosine distance.</p>
      <p>This approach yields 3rd position in subtask 1 by attaining 0.199
as a Mean Average Precision and has also obtained highest overall
recall (0.652) among the other participated systems. It has attained
0.0058 as a Mean Average Precision in subtask 2. The absence of
gold-data in the training phase constrained to tune the system
using hyper parameters in doc2vec. Hence the future work will be
to focus more on developing a performance measurement method
for unsupervised retrieval system.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Barathi</given-names>
            <surname>Ganesh</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>HB</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Anand Kumar</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>M</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Soman</given-names>
            <surname>KP</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>Distributional Semantic Representation for Text Classification</article-title>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Information Retrieval.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Quoc</given-names>
            <surname>Le</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Tomas</given-names>
            <surname>Mikolov</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2014</year>
          .
          <article-title>Distributed representations of sentences and documents</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-14)</source>
          .
          <fpage>1188</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1196</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Arpan</given-names>
            <surname>Mandal</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Kripabandhu Ghosh, Arnab Bhattacharya, Arindam Pal, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Saptarshi</given-names>
            <surname>Ghosh</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the FIRE 2017 track: Information Retrieval from Legal Documents (IRLeD)</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Working notes of FIRE</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          <article-title>- Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation (CEUR Workshop Proceedings</article-title>
          ).
          <source>CEUR-WS.org.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Mandar</given-names>
            <surname>Mitra</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>BB</given-names>
            <surname>Chaudhuri</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2000</year>
          .
          <article-title>Information retrieval from documents: A survey</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information retrieval 2</source>
          ,
          <fpage>2</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>3</lpage>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          ),
          <fpage>141</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>163</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Peter</surname>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Turney</surname>
            and
            <given-names>Patrick</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pantel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          .
          <article-title>From frequency to meaning: Vector space models of semantics</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of artificial intelligence research 37</source>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ),
          <fpage>141</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>188</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>