Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36864054›Full record

ArticleScientific data2023

The Three Terms Task - an open benchmark to compare human and artificial semantic representations.

V Borghesani, J Armoza, M N Hebart, P Bellec, S M Brambati

Open access · goldAbstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

V BorghesaniCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montréal, QC, H3W 1W6, Canada. Valentina.Borghesani@unige.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-7909-8631
J ArmozaCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montréal, QC, H3W 1W6, Canada.
M N HebartVision and Computational Cognition Group, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7257-428X
P BellecCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montréal, QC, H3W 1W6, Canada.
S M BrambatiCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montréal, QC, H3W 1W6, Canada.
Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal · CAJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Word processing entails retrieval of a unitary yet multidimensional semantic representation (e.g., a lemon's colour, flavour, possible use) and has been investigated in both cognitive neuroscience and artificial intelligence. To enable the direct comparison of human and artificial semantic representations, and to support the use of natural language processing (NLP) for computational modelling of human understanding, a critical challenge is the development of benchmarks of appropriate size and complexity. Here we present a dataset probing semantic knowledge with a three-terms semantic associative task: which of two target words is more closely associated with a given anchor (e.g., is lemon closer to squeezer or sour?). The dataset includes both abstract and concrete nouns for a total of 10,107 triplets. For the 2,255 triplets with varying levels of agreement among NLP word embeddings, we additionally collected behavioural similarity judgments from 1,322 human raters. We hope that this openly available, large-scale dataset will be a useful benchmark for both computational and neuroscientific investigations of semantic knowledge.

Identifiers

PMID36864054
PMCPMC9981885
OpenAlexW4322764463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.