-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
1533 fix and 1464 1423 comments #1573
Changes from 7 commits
21c4401
0590c2f
34dc58f
32b66bd
9b3f801
2698aa7
accea8c
8854097
bbaf3f7
4e555c4
b16554f
a94a3fd
f9cc04f
5bbe144
1481342
fb7fbb1
d7bdcc0
336f4f6
e866d3f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -64,8 +64,8 @@ | |
import warnings | ||
from collections import defaultdict | ||
import itertools as it | ||
from functools import partial | ||
from math import log | ||
from inspect import getargspec | ||
|
||
from six import iteritems, string_types, next | ||
|
||
|
@@ -137,18 +137,31 @@ def __init__(self, sentences=None, min_count=5, threshold=10.0, | |
should be a byte string (e.g. b'_'). | ||
|
||
`scoring` specifies how potential phrases are scored for comparison to the `threshold` | ||
setting. two settings are available: | ||
'default': from "Efficient Estimaton of Word Representations in Vector Space" by | ||
Mikolov, et. al.: | ||
(count(worda followed by wordb) - min_count) * N / | ||
(count(worda) * count(wordb)) > threshold`, where `N` is the total vocabulary size. | ||
'npmi': normalized pointwise mutual information, from "Normalized (Pointwise) Mutual | ||
Information in Colocation Extraction" by Gerlof Bouma: | ||
ln(prop(worda followed by wordb) / (prop(worda)*prop(wordb))) / | ||
- ln(prop(worda followed by wordb) | ||
where prop(n) is the count of n / the count of everything in the entire corpus | ||
'npmi' is more robust when dealing with common words that form part of common bigrams, and | ||
setting. `scoring` can be set with either a string that refers to a built-in scoring function, | ||
or with a function with the expected parameter names. Two built-in scoring functions are available | ||
by setting `scoring` to a string: | ||
'default': from "Efficient Estimaton of Word Representations in Vector Space" by | ||
Mikolov, et. al.: | ||
(count(worda followed by wordb) - min_count) * N / | ||
(count(worda) * count(wordb)) > threshold`, where `N` is the total vocabulary size. | ||
'npmi': normalized pointwise mutual information, from "Normalized (Pointwise) Mutual | ||
Information in Colocation Extraction" by Gerlof Bouma: | ||
ln(prop(worda followed by wordb) / (prop(worda)*prop(wordb))) / | ||
- ln(prop(worda followed by wordb) | ||
where prop(n) is the count of n / the count of everything in the entire corpus | ||
'npmi' is more robust when dealing with common words that form part of common bigrams, and | ||
ranges from -1 to 1, but is slower to calculate than the default | ||
To use a custom scoring function, create a function with the following parameters and set the `scoring` | ||
parameter to the custom function. You must use all the parameters in your function call, even if the | ||
function does not require all the parameters. | ||
worda_count: number of occurrances in `sentences` of the first token in the phrase being scored | ||
wordb_count: number of occurrances in `sentences` of the second token in the phrase being scored | ||
bigram_count: number of occurrances in `sentences` of the phrase being scored | ||
len_vocab: the number of unique tokens in `sentences` | ||
min_count: the `min_count` setting of the Phrases class | ||
corpus_word_count: the total number of (non-unique) tokens in `sentences` | ||
A scoring function without any of these parameters (even if the parameters are not used) will | ||
raise a ValueError on initialization of the Phrases class | ||
|
||
""" | ||
if min_count <= 0: | ||
|
@@ -159,8 +172,23 @@ def __init__(self, sentences=None, min_count=5, threshold=10.0, | |
if scoring == 'npmi' and (threshold < -1 or threshold > 1): | ||
raise ValueError("threshold should be between -1 and 1 for npmi scoring") | ||
|
||
if not (scoring == 'default' or scoring == 'npmi'): | ||
raise ValueError('unknown scoring function "' + scoring + '" specified') | ||
# set scoring based on string | ||
# intentially override the value of the scoring parameter rather than set self.scoring here, | ||
# to still run the check of scoring function parameters in the next code block | ||
if type(scoring) is str: | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
|
||
if scoring == 'default': | ||
scoring = original_scorer | ||
elif scoring == 'npmi': | ||
scoring = npmi_scorer | ||
else: | ||
raise ValueError('unknown scoring method string %s specified' % (scoring)) | ||
|
||
scoring_parameters = ['worda_count', 'wordb_count', 'bigram_count', 'len_vocab', 'min_count', 'corpus_word_count'] | ||
if callable(scoring): | ||
if all(parameter in getargspec(scoring)[0] for parameter in scoring_parameters): | ||
self.scoring = scoring | ||
else: | ||
raise ValueError('scoring function missing expected parameters') | ||
|
||
self.min_count = min_count | ||
self.threshold = threshold | ||
|
@@ -169,7 +197,6 @@ def __init__(self, sentences=None, min_count=5, threshold=10.0, | |
self.min_reduce = 1 # ignore any tokens with count smaller than this | ||
self.delimiter = delimiter | ||
self.progress_per = progress_per | ||
self.scoring = scoring | ||
self.corpus_word_count = 0 | ||
|
||
if sentences is not None: | ||
|
@@ -222,8 +249,7 @@ def add_vocab(self, sentences): | |
# directly, but gives the new sentences a fighting chance to collect | ||
# sufficient counts, before being pruned out by the (large) accummulated | ||
# counts collected in previous learn_vocab runs. | ||
min_reduce, vocab, total_words = \ | ||
self.learn_vocab(sentences, self.max_vocab_size, self.delimiter, self.progress_per) | ||
min_reduce, vocab, total_words = self.learn_vocab(sentences, self.max_vocab_size, self.delimiter, self.progress_per) | ||
|
||
self.corpus_word_count += total_words | ||
if len(self.vocab) > 0: | ||
|
@@ -258,16 +284,13 @@ def export_phrases(self, sentences, out_delimiter=b' ', as_tuples=False): | |
threshold = self.threshold | ||
delimiter = self.delimiter # delimiter used for lookup | ||
min_count = self.min_count | ||
scoring = self.scoring | ||
corpus_word_count = self.corpus_word_count | ||
scorer = self.scoring | ||
# made floats for scoring function | ||
len_vocab = float(len(vocab)) | ||
scorer_min_count = float(min_count) | ||
corpus_word_count = float(self.corpus_word_count) | ||
|
||
|
||
if scoring == 'default': | ||
scoring_function = \ | ||
partial(self.original_scorer, len_vocab=float(len(vocab)), min_count=float(min_count)) | ||
elif scoring == 'npmi': | ||
scoring_function = \ | ||
partial(self.npmi_scorer, corpus_word_count=corpus_word_count) | ||
# no else here to catch unknown scoring function, check is done in Phrases.__init__ | ||
|
||
for sentence in sentences: | ||
s = [utils.any2utf8(w) for w in sentence] | ||
|
@@ -281,11 +304,10 @@ def export_phrases(self, sentences, out_delimiter=b' ', as_tuples=False): | |
count_a = float(vocab[word_a]) | ||
count_b = float(vocab[word_b]) | ||
count_ab = float(vocab[bigram_word]) | ||
score = scoring_function(count_a, count_b, count_ab) | ||
# scoring MUST have all these parameters, even if they are not used | ||
score = scorer(worda_count=count_a, wordb_count=count_b, bigram_count=count_ab, len_vocab=len_vocab, min_count=scorer_min_count, corpus_word_count=corpus_word_count) | ||
# logger.debug("score for %s: (pab=%s - min_count=%s) / pa=%s / pb=%s * vocab_size=%s = %s", | ||
# bigram_word, pab, self.min_count, pa, pb, len(self.vocab), score) | ||
# added mincount check because if the scorer doesn't contain min_count | ||
# it would not be enforced otherwise | ||
# bigram_word, count_ab, scorer_min_count, count_a, count_ab, len_vocab, score) | ||
if score > threshold and count_ab >= min_count: | ||
if as_tuples: | ||
yield ((word_a, word_b), score) | ||
|
@@ -316,6 +338,16 @@ def __getitem__(self, sentence): | |
""" | ||
warnings.warn("For a faster implementation, use the gensim.models.phrases.Phraser class") | ||
|
||
vocab = self.vocab | ||
threshold = self.threshold | ||
delimiter = self.delimiter # delimiter used for lookup | ||
min_count = self.min_count | ||
scorer = self.scoring | ||
# made floats for scoring function | ||
len_vocab = float(len(vocab)) | ||
scorer_min_count = float(min_count) | ||
corpus_word_count = float(self.corpus_word_count) | ||
|
||
is_single, sentence = _is_single(sentence) | ||
if not is_single: | ||
# if the input is an entire corpus (rather than a single sentence), | ||
|
@@ -325,20 +357,20 @@ def __getitem__(self, sentence): | |
s, new_s = [utils.any2utf8(w) for w in sentence], [] | ||
last_bigram = False | ||
vocab = self.vocab | ||
threshold = self.threshold | ||
delimiter = self.delimiter | ||
min_count = self.min_count | ||
|
||
for word_a, word_b in zip(s, s[1:]): | ||
if word_a in vocab and word_b in vocab: | ||
# last bigram check was moved here to save a few CPU cycles | ||
if word_a in vocab and word_b in vocab and not last_bigram: | ||
bigram_word = delimiter.join((word_a, word_b)) | ||
if bigram_word in vocab and not last_bigram: | ||
pa = float(vocab[word_a]) | ||
pb = float(vocab[word_b]) | ||
pab = float(vocab[bigram_word]) | ||
score = (pab - min_count) / pa / pb * len(vocab) | ||
if bigram_word in vocab: | ||
count_a = float(vocab[word_a]) | ||
count_b = float(vocab[word_b]) | ||
count_ab = float(vocab[bigram_word]) | ||
# scoring MUST have all these parameters, even if they are not used | ||
score = scorer(worda_count=count_a, wordb_count=count_b, bigram_count=count_ab, len_vocab=len_vocab, min_count=scorer_min_count, corpus_word_count=corpus_word_count) | ||
# logger.debug("score for %s: (pab=%s - min_count=%s) / pa=%s / pb=%s * vocab_size=%s = %s", | ||
# bigram_word, pab, self.min_count, pa, pb, len(self.vocab), score) | ||
if score > threshold: | ||
# bigram_word, count_ab, scorer_min_count, count_a, count_ab, len_vocab, score) | ||
if score > threshold and count_ab >= min_count: | ||
new_s.append(bigram_word) | ||
last_bigram = True | ||
continue | ||
|
@@ -354,15 +386,15 @@ def __getitem__(self, sentence): | |
|
||
return [utils.to_unicode(w) for w in new_s] | ||
|
||
# these two built-in scoring methods don't cast everything to float because the casting is done in the call | ||
# to the scoring method in __getitem__ and export_phrases. | ||
|
||
# calculation of score based on original mikolov word2vec paper | ||
# len_vocab and min_count set so functools.partial works | ||
@staticmethod | ||
def original_scorer(worda_count, wordb_count, bigram_count, len_vocab=0.0, min_count=0.0): | ||
def original_scorer(worda_count, wordb_count, bigram_count, len_vocab, min_count, corpus_word_count): | ||
return (bigram_count - min_count) / worda_count / wordb_count * len_vocab | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Bad indent. |
||
|
||
# normalized PMI, requires corpus size | ||
@staticmethod | ||
def npmi_scorer(worda_count, wordb_count, bigram_count, corpus_word_count=0.0): | ||
def npmi_scorer(worda_count, wordb_count, bigram_count, len_vocab, min_count, corpus_word_count): | ||
pa = worda_count / corpus_word_count | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Bad indent. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Sorry about these, very sloppy on my part. |
||
pb = wordb_count / corpus_word_count | ||
pab = bigram_count / corpus_word_count | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -1563,7 +1563,7 @@ def __init__(self, source, max_sentence_length=MAX_WORDS_IN_BATCH, limit=None): | |
""" | ||
`source` should be a path to a directory (as a string) where all files can be opened by the | ||
LineSentence class. Each file will be read up to | ||
`limit` lines (or no clipped if limit is None, the default). | ||
`limit` lines (or not clipped if limit is None, the default). | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The docs are not clear -- does the "will process all files in a directory" work recursively? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It does not. Maybe wishlist? I've clarified the docs. |
||
|
||
Example:: | ||
|
||
|
@@ -1577,23 +1577,23 @@ def __init__(self, source, max_sentence_length=MAX_WORDS_IN_BATCH, limit=None): | |
self.limit = limit | ||
|
||
if os.path.isfile(self.source): | ||
logging.warning('single file read, better to use models.word2vec.LineSentence') | ||
logger.warning('single file read, better to use models.word2vec.LineSentence') | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If the class API contract supports it, this is no warning (maybe debug, at most). If it's outside the API contract, this is an error and we should raise an exception, not log a warning. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Clarified this message a bit, made it debug. |
||
self.input_files = [self.source] # force code compatibility with list of files | ||
elif os.path.isdir(self.source): | ||
self.source = os.path.join(self.source, '') # ensures os-specific slash at end of path | ||
logging.debug('reading directory ' + self.source) | ||
logger.warning('reading directory %s', self.source) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why is this a warning? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I made a mistake, changing to info. |
||
self.input_files = os.listdir(self.source) | ||
self.input_files = [self.source + file for file in self.input_files] # make full paths | ||
self.input_files = [self.source + filename for filename in self.input_files] # make full paths | ||
self.input_files.sort() # makes sure it happens in filename order | ||
else: # not a file or a directory, then we can't do anything with it | ||
raise ValueError('input is neither a file nor a path') | ||
|
||
logging.info('files read into PathLineSentences:' + '\n'.join(self.input_files)) | ||
logger.info('files read into PathLineSentences:%s', '\n'.join(self.input_files)) | ||
|
||
def __iter__(self): | ||
'''iterate through the files''' | ||
for file_name in self.input_files: | ||
logging.info('reading file ' + file_name) | ||
logger.info('reading file %s', file_name) | ||
with utils.smart_open(file_name) as fin: | ||
for line in itertools.islice(fin, self.limit): | ||
line = utils.to_unicode(line).split() | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Import not used?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Used in line 188 (in the commit your comments are on) to check for the proper parameters in the pluggable scoring function.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, I see it now. What is that check for though? Python is duck-typed by convention, so "type checks" are best postponed until truly needed (something breaks).
What is the rationale for this pre-emptive type check?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Mostly to save the stress that would result from improperly specifying a scoring function when initializing the phrases object. I know Python will do the type checking when the scoring function is called, but that won't happen until export_phrases or getitem is called. The "normal" workflow for the Phrases object is to just specify sentences on load, or to use add_vocab. Only after that does the scoring function get called.
I could easily see a user specifying a bad scoring method and then making the vocab dictionary from their large corpus. Only after significant time extracting vocab from a corpus do they then discover that something is wrong with how they specified scoring. At this point you could manually specify a correct scoring function, but that requires you to set it directly. Users also wouldn't have an easy bailout in the form of use one of the scorer string settings, since those are only checked when the Phrases object is created--the user would have to figure out how to specify those built in scorers which would mean opening up the code. This seems a bit user unfriendly, I feel it is friendlier to just do the type checking on initialization even if it is less Pythonic.
This could be fixed with a set_scorer method that takes the string or function input, but that seems a bit more awkward than just doing this type check.
There's also an issue with wanting to raise an informative exception when the scoring function is called in getitem or export_phrases and the types don't match, but that means adding a try/except into the main scoring loop and that seems awkward as well. I think its better to just do that try/except once when the object is initialized.
But I defer to your judgement on this--what do you think is best?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, I see your argument (that checking early a little more convenient).
I'm not sure if it's worth it, but don't care much either way. I'll defer to @menshikh-iv :)