I have a word embedding matrix (say M) obtained of order V x N where V is the size of the vocabulary and N is the size of each word vector. I want the word2vec model of gensim to initialise its word embedding matrix with M, during training. I am able to load M in the word2vec format using
gensim.models.keyedvectors.Word2VecKeyedVectors.load_word2vec_format(model_file)
but I don't know how to feed M into the gensim word2vec model.
The Gensim Word2Vec model isn't designed to be pre-initialized with outside vectors, so there's no built-in helper methods.
But of course since the source is available, and all objects can be modified by your direct tampering, you can still change/replace its usual (random) initialization with anything of your own choosing, wiht a little effort.
Specifically, you'd first create a Word2Vec model using the constructor without yet supplying any training corpus. (If you supply a corpus, it will automatically do the next two build_vocab() and train() steps for you, and you don't want that.)
Then, you'd perform the necessary .build_vocab() step, allowing it to survey your training text data to discover its vocabulary with word-frequencies, and perform its usual model initialization:
model.build_vocab(corpus)
At this point, before doing any other training, you can tamper with the model to replace its random-initialization of words with your alternate word-vectors, as from the vectors you've loaded. If your other vectors are in the KeyedVectors variable loaded_kv, this could be as simple as:
for word in loaded_kv.index_to_key:
if word in model.wv:
model.kv[word] = loaded_kv[word]
Note that if your loaded_kv includes words that aren't in the corpus, or too rare (appear fewer than min_count times) in the corpus, the model will not have allocated a space for those vectors – as they won't be used in training – and they won't be part of the final model.
If for some reason you need them to be, you should ensure a sufficient number of valid usage examples of those words appear inside the corpus. You shouldn't add them to the model in a ways that changes the total number of vectors in model.wv after .build_vocab(), because the model is not expecting that sort of change, and errors/undefined-behavior are likely.
(You also shouldn't simply force extra words that aren't in the real training data into the model, because while they will remain unchanged through training, all other words will continue to be adjusted through training – meaning any words that weren't also incrementally adjusted, in an interleaved fashion, along with the rest may wind up essentially "incompatible" with the word-vectors that were co-trained in the same full model.)
After you've modified the model's initialization to match your preferences, continue with normal training, something like:
model.train(corpus, total_examples=model.corpus_count, epochs=model.epochs)
Related
I have a doc2vec model trained on documents with labels. I'm trying to continue training my model with model.train(). The new data comes with new labels as well, but, when I train it on more documents, the new labels aren't being recorded... Does anyone know what my problem might be?
Gensim's Doc2Vec only learns its set of tags at the same time it learns the corpus vocabulary of unique words – during the first call to .build_vocab() on the original corpus.
When you train with additional examples that have either words or tags that aren't already known to the model, those words or tags are simply ignored.
(The .build_vocab(…, update=True) option that's available on Word2Vec to expand its vocabulary has never been fully applied to Doc2Vec, either with respect to tags or with respect to a longstanding crashing bug. So it's not supported on Doc2Vec.)
Note that if it is your aim to create document-vectors that assist in some downstream-classification task, you may not want to supply your known-labels as tags, or at least not as a document's only tag.
The tags you supply to Doc2Vec are the units for which it learns vectors. If you have a million text examples, but only 5 different labels, if you feed those million examples into training each with only the label as a tag, the model is only learning 5 doc-vectors. It is, essentially, like you're training on only 5 mega-documents (passed in in chunks) – and thus 'summarizing' each label down to a single point in vector-space, when it might be far more useful to think of a label as covering a irregularly-shaped "point cloud".
So, you might instead want to use document-IDs rather than labels. (Or, labels and document-IDs.) Then, use the many varied vectors from all individual documents – rather than single vectors per label – to train some downstream classifier or clusterer.
And in that case, the arrival of documents with new labels might not require a full Doc2Vec-retraining. Instead, if the new documents still get useful vectors from inference on the older Doc2Vec model, those per-doc vectors may reflect enough about the new label's documents that downstream classifiers can learn to recognize them.
Ultiamtely, though, if you acquire much more training data, reflecting all new vocabularies & word-senses, the safest approach is to retrain a Doc2Vec model from scratch, using all data. Simply incremental training, even if it had official support, risks pulling those words/tags that appear in new data arbitrarily out-of-comparable-alignment with words/tags that were only trained in the original dataset. It is the interleaved co-training, alongside all other examples equally, which pushes-and-pulls all vectors in a model into useful relative arrangements.
I've read and heard(In the CS224 of Stanford) that the Word2Vec algorithm actually trains two matrices(that is, two sets of vectors.) These two are the U and the V set, one for words being a target and one for words being the context. The final output is the average of these two.
I have two questions in mind. one is that:
Why do we get an average of two vectors? Why it makes sense? Don't we lose some information?
The second question is, using pre-trained word2vec models, how can I get access to both matrices? Is there any downloadable word2vec with both sets of vectors? I don't have enough resources to train a new one.
Thanks
That relayed description isn't quite right. The word-vectors traditionally retrieved from a word2vec model come from a "projection matrix" which converts individual words to a right-sized input-vector for the shallow neural network.
(You could think of the projection matrix as turning a one-hot encoding into a dense-embedding for that word, but libraries typically implement this via a dictionary-lookup – eg: "what row of the vectors-matrix should I consult for this word-token?")
There's another matrix of weights leading to the model's output nodes, whose interpretation varies based on the training mode. In the common default of negative-sampling, there's one node per known word, so you could also interpret this matrix as having a vector per word. (In hierarchical-softmax mode, the known-words aren't encoded as single output nodes, so it's harder to interpret the relationship of this matrix to individual words.)
However, this second vector per word is rarely made directly available by libraries. Most commonly, the word-vector is considered simply the trained-up input vector, from the projection matrix. For example, the export format from Google's original word2vec.c release only saves-out those vectors, and the large "GoogleNews" vector set they released only has those vectors. (There's no averaging with the other output-side representation.)
Some work, especially that of Mitra et all of Microsoft Research (in "Dual Embedding Space Models" & associated writeups) has noted those output-side vectors may be of value in some applications as well – but I haven't seen much other work using those vectors. (And, even in that work, they're not averaged with the traditional vectors, but consulted as a separate option for some purposes.)
You'd have to look at the code of whichever libraries you're using to see if you can fetch these from their full post-training model representation. In the Python gensim library, this second matrix in the negative-sampling case is a model property named syn1neg, following the naming of the original word2vec.c.
I know that some methods of generating word embeddings (e.g. CBOW) are based on predicting the likelihood of a given word appearing in a given context. I'm working with polish language, which is sometimes ambiguous with respect to segmentation, e.g. 'Coś' can be either treated as one word, or two words which have been conjoined ('Co' + '-ś') depending on the context. What I want to do, is create a tokenizer which is context sensitive. Assuming that I have the vector representation of the preceding context, and all possible segmentations, could I somehow calculate, or approximate the likelihood of particular words appearing in this context?
This very much depends on the way how you got your embeddings. The CBOW model has two parameters the embedding matrix that is denoted v and the output projection matrix v'. If you want to recover the probabilities that are used in the CBOW model at training time, you need to get v' as well.
See equation (2) in the word2vec paper. Tools for pre-computing word embeddings usually don't do that, so you would need to modify them yourself.
Anyway, if you want to compute a probability of a word, given a context, you should rather think about using a (neural) language model than a table of word embeddings. If you search the Internet, I am sure you will find something that suits your needs.
I am in a case that I don't have any pre-trained words embedding for my domain (Vietnamese food reviews). so I got a though of embedding from the general and specific corpus.
And the point here is can I use the dataset of training, test and validating (did preprocess) as a source for creating my own word embeddings. If don't, hope you can give your experience.
Based on my intuition, and some experiments a wide corpus appears to be better, but I'd like to know if there's relevant research or other relevant results.
can I use the dataset of training, test and validating (did
preprocess) as a source for creating my own word embeddings
Sure, embeddings are not your features for your machine learning model. They are the "computational representation" of your data. In short, they are made of words represented in a vector space. With embeddings, your data is less sparse. Using word embeddings could be considered part of the pre-processing step of NLP.
Usually (I mean, using the most used technique, word2vec), the representation of a word in the vector space is defined by its surroundings (the words that it commonly goes along with).
Therefore, to create embeddings, the larger the corpus, the better, since it can better place a word vector in the vector space (and hence compare it to other similar words).
What is the difference between word2vec and glove?
Are both the ways to train a word embedding? if yes then how can we use both?
Yes, they're both ways to train a word embedding. They both provide the same core output: one vector per word, with the vectors in a useful arrangement. That is, the vectors' relative distances/directions roughly correspond with human ideas of overall word relatedness, and even relatedness along certain salient semantic dimensions.
Word2Vec does incremental, 'sparse' training of a neural network, by repeatedly iterating over a training corpus.
GloVe works to fit vectors to model a giant word co-occurrence matrix built from the corpus.
Working from the same corpus, creating word-vectors of the same dimensionality, and devoting the same attention to meta-optimizations, the quality of their resulting word-vectors will be roughly similar. (When I've seen someone confidently claim one or the other is definitely better, they've often compared some tweaked/best-case use of one algorithm against some rough/arbitrary defaults of the other.)
I'm more familiar with Word2Vec, and my impression is that Word2Vec's training better scales to larger vocabularies, and has more tweakable settings that, if you have the time, might allow tuning your own trained word-vectors more to your specific application. (For example, using a small-versus-large window parameter can have a strong effect on whether a word's nearest-neighbors are 'drop-in replacement words' or more generally words-used-in-the-same-topics. Different downstream applications may prefer word-vectors that skew one way or the other.)
Conversely, some proponents of GLoVe tout that it does fairly well without needing metaparameter optimization.
You probably wouldn't use both, unless comparing them against each other, because they play the same role for any downstream applications of word-vectors.
Word2vec is a predictive model: trains by trying to predict a target word given a context (CBOW method) or the context words from the target (skip-gram method). It uses trainable embedding weights to map words to their corresponding embeddings, which are used to help the model make predictions. The loss function for training the model is related to how good the model’s predictions are, so as the model trains to make better predictions it will result in better embeddings.
The Glove is based on matrix factorization techniques on the word-context matrix. It first constructs a large matrix of (words x context) co-occurrence information, i.e. for each “word” (the rows), you count how frequently (matrix values) we see this word in some “context” (the columns) in a large corpus. The number of “contexts” would be very large, since it is essentially combinatorial in size. So we factorize this matrix to yield a lower-dimensional (word x features) matrix, where each row now yields a vector representation for each word. In general, this is done by minimizing a “reconstruction loss”. This loss tries to find the lower-dimensional representations which can explain most of the variance in the high-dimensional data.
Before GloVe, the algorithms of word representations can be divided into two main streams, the statistic-based (LDA) and learning-based (Word2Vec). LDA produces the low dimensional word vectors by singular value decomposition (SVD) on the co-occurrence matrix, while Word2Vec employs a three-layer neural network to do the center-context word pair classification task where word vectors are just the by-product.
The most amazing point from Word2Vec is that similar words are located together in the vector space and arithmetic operations on word vectors can pose semantic or syntactic relationships, e.g., “king” - “man” + “woman” -> “queen” or “better” - “good” + “bad” -> “worse”. However, LDA cannot maintain such linear relationship in vector space.
The motivation of GloVe is to force the model to learn such linear relationship based on the co-occurreence matrix explicitly. Essentially, GloVe is a log-bilinear model with a weighted least-squares objective. Obviously, it is a hybrid method that uses machine learning based on the statistic matrix, and this is the general difference between GloVe and Word2Vec.
If we dive into the deduction procedure of the equations in GloVe, we will find the difference inherent in the intuition. GloVe observes that ratios of word-word co-occurrence probabilities have the potential for encoding some form of meaning. Take the example from StanfordNLP (Global Vectors for Word Representation), to consider the co-occurrence probabilities for target words ice and steam with various probe words from the vocabulary:
As one might expect, ice co-occurs more frequently with solid than it
does with gas, whereas steam co-occurs more frequently with gas than
it does with solid.
Both words co-occur with their shared property water frequently, and both co-occur with the unrelated word fashion infrequently.
Only in the ratio of probabilities does noise from non-discriminative words like water and fashion cancel out, so that large values (much greater than 1) correlate well with properties specific to ice, and small values (much less than 1) correlate well with properties specific of steam.
However, Word2Vec works on the pure co-occurrence probabilities so that the probability that the words surrounding the target word to be the context is maximized.
In the practice, to speed up the training process, Word2Vec employs negative sampling to substitute the softmax fucntion by the sigmoid function operating on the real data and noise data. This emplicitly results in the clustering of words into a cone in the vector space while GloVe’s word vectors are located more discretely.