<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C00-1022">
  <Title>Exogeneous and Endogeneous Approaches to Semantic Categorization of Unknown Technical Terms</Title>
  <Section position="8" start_page="149" end_page="150" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
7 Conclusion and Further Work
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> We have presented in this paper two al)proaches to term semantic categorization that have been fully implemented and experimented on significant test sets. The results achieved in this work demonstrate that term categorization tasks could be integrated within a senti-automatic  termil~ology acquisition t)ro(:ess to l)rovide an active sut)I)ort to terminologists.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The soluti(ms 1;(2 i;his 1)rol)lem (:~m 1)e (:onsi(ternbly ixnl)rovcd mid we h~ve \](hint\]tied s(;vernl t2romising dire('tions for tin'thin' r(',scar(:h. Our exl)eriments show that cxogen(xms c~tegoriza,tion is notice~fl)ly the most et\[icicnt of both &amp;t)l)ro~ehes. now(?ver~ il; requires lmlch more knowledge sour(:cs and comlmt~tion~fl overtmad.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> It is more eXl)osed to (tatn slmrsencss , since large amounts of contextual data are not nlways available, especially in technical domains. We should stress that this study 12(m(~tiix;d fl'om the av;filal)ility of a highly relewmt corpus. This means that, for sak(; of rolmsl;lt(;ss, ol;hcr ~netho(ls (even less eflici(mt) and relewmt knowle(lge sources should not t)e negle(:t(xl. Tim two i)rol)oscd hilt)roaches are (:()mt)lemeld;;wy in the sense i;h;~t tlmy take a(lvm~l,~ge of distinct kn(2wledgc, sources. Further work wilt investigal;c the various whys to (:omt2ilm them in order 1;(2 iml2rove the overall t)erforman(:(,,.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> The use of rel~tiomd inibrmation, mM t)articulnrly syntactic x'elati(ms, is anoth('.r major (til'e(:tion for further r(;sear(:h. Exogeneous (:atcgoriz;ttion in based on ~t bag of wor(Is/lcmmas model since wide (:ontexts oi7 hmnnatiz(;d words were used, without (:onsi(h~ration for the l)ositions of these (:ues and th(;ir l)ol;(;nl;i:d synta('tic rel;ttionshil)s with tim l;arg(;1; 1;(~t~ns. Syn|;a(:tic int'(2rm~tion cxtr~u:t(,,(l fl:om lo(:nl (:()nt(;xl;, as verl)-ot)j('x't relations, is :mother major source tbr exogeneous ('atcgorization that has t)e(m ex1)loit(xl in thesmu'us ext(;nsion methods. The endog(meous ni)l)roa(:h C&amp;ll ;dso l)e improved l)y exl)h)iting the synl;~mti(: sl;ru(:i;m'(', of the t(;(:lmi(:al l;o, rllls, ilt Ollr ;tl)t)l'();t(;ll: all (;()lnI)o12elll;s of l;e(:lmical terms ~r(; equally wcighl;cxl, indet)(;ndenl;ly of their synta(:tic roh;s wil;hin l;he l;crms. More accurate nsso(:i~tion s(:ol(~s can 1)e intro(tuced by tnking a(tvmltage of head/modifier relations. null Finally, we should note that the |)\]lingual nntm:e of our terminological rcsour(:(~s has 11(2|; t)een I;&amp;k(m into a(:(xmnt, Minor ('hm~ges are required to make the two classifiers work for El~glish.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> Furl;tmr experiments will l)e (:ondu(:t(xt on the English resour(:(;s, in this l)ilingual (:ont(~xl~, either the Frcn(:h (2r the English (~xt)r(~,ssion (or both) (:ouht 1)e used to categorize a given term.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>