25-01-2016, 12:21 PM
I am acquainted with the ANN basics, the problem is not with that, but with that we don't find in the article some very important points such as:
- what are the authors' objectives
- what are the steps intended to reach them
- what are the limitations of the proposed approach (iif any)
- what were the steps actually taken
- what the results mean, or are supposed to mean (I really don't understand that cluster pic, it is presented that the two clusters of vords result somehow, but what are they for or what do they tell us - it's not clear)
As Rene pointed elsewhere, it is not clear what were the input text blocks and whether input feeding was consistent.
It would be a very interesting result if, say, based on analysis of the VMS text except f68r1 and f68r2, we would obtain the suggestion (from the ANN algorythm) that all vords serving as star labels in f68r1 and f68r2 are "similar". Is this the result obtained in the paper? I don't know. It's excessively brief and a bit messy. We just need more detail and incorporation of the "objective -> result" discourse.
- what are the authors' objectives
- what are the steps intended to reach them
- what are the limitations of the proposed approach (iif any)
- what were the steps actually taken
- what the results mean, or are supposed to mean (I really don't understand that cluster pic, it is presented that the two clusters of vords result somehow, but what are they for or what do they tell us - it's not clear)
As Rene pointed elsewhere, it is not clear what were the input text blocks and whether input feeding was consistent.
It would be a very interesting result if, say, based on analysis of the VMS text except f68r1 and f68r2, we would obtain the suggestion (from the ANN algorythm) that all vords serving as star labels in f68r1 and f68r2 are "similar". Is this the result obtained in the paper? I don't know. It's excessively brief and a bit messy. We just need more detail and incorporation of the "objective -> result" discourse.