ICSTE 2011 Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Conference on Software Technology and Engineering 3rd Edition International Conference On Software Technology And Engineering 2024 Scribd Download
ICSTE 2011 Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Conference on Software Technology and Engineering 3rd Edition International Conference On Software Technology And Engineering 2024 Scribd Download
ICSTE 2011 Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Conference on Software Technology and Engineering 3rd Edition International Conference On Software Technology And Engineering 2024 Scribd Download
https://ebookultra.com
https://ebookultra.com/download/proceedings-of-the-international-
conference-on-education-reflection-and-development-1st-edition-vasile-
chis/
ebookultra.com
https://ebookultra.com/download/essentials-of-software-
engineering-3rd-edition-frank-tsui/
ebookultra.com
ICSTE 2011 Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International
Conference on Software Technology and Engineering 3rd
Edition International Conference On Software
Technology And Engineering Digital Instant Download
Author(s): International Conference on Software Technology and Engineering
ISBN(s): 9780791859797, 0791859797
Edition: 3
File Details: PDF, 45.90 MB
Year: 2011
Language: english
Procceeding
gs of thhe 20111
3rd Internation
nal Connferencce on
Sofftware Technoology aand Enngineeriing
(ICST
TE 2011)
August 12
2 – 14, 22011
Ku
uala Lum
mpur, Maalaysia
All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Except as permitted under the
United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or
distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
For authorization to photocopy material for internal or personal use under those
circumstances not falling within the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act, contact the
Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, tel: 978-
750-8400, www.copyright.com.
Requests for special permission or bulk reproduction should be addressed to the ASME Publishing
Department, or submitted online at:
http://www.asme.org/Publications/Books/Administration/Permissions.cfm
ASME Press books are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums or for use in
corporate training programs. For more information, contact Special Sales at [email protected]
ISBN-13: 978-0-7918-5979-7
ASME Order No. 859797
We would like to thank the program chairs, organization staff, and the
members of the program committees for their work. Thanks also go to
the editors for their wonderful editorial service to this proceeding.
Honorary Chair
Prof. Houssain Kettani, Polytechnic University Puerto Rico, USA
Prof. Gregory Newby, Univ of Alaska, USA
Debbie McCoy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA
Publicity Chairs
Prof. Srimathi.H, SRM University
Prof. Afaq Ahmad, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman
Ms. Liu Guiping, Chengdu Young Education & Consultancy Co., Ltd.,
China
Organizing Committees
Mr. Wang Hao, Chengdu Young Education & Consultancy Co., Ltd., China
Ms. Zhang Ting, Chengdu Young Education & Consultancy Co., Ltd.,
China
Technical Committees
Prof.N.Jaisankar, School of Computing Sciences, VIT University, India
Razvan Raducanu, "Al. I. Cuza" University, Romania
Jivesh Govil, Cisco Systems Inc., CA USA
Prof. Raja Suzana Raja Kasim, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia
Dr. Mo adda, University of Portsmouth, UK
Dr Deepak Laxmi Narasimha, University of Malaya, Malaysia
Dr. Deng Liao, Concordia University, Canada
Prof. Peddoju Sateesh Kumar, Balaji Institute of Technology & Science,
India
Dr. Srinivasan Alavandar, Indian Institute of Technology, India
Dr. K.S. Cheung, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Prof. Ashwani Kush, IIT kanpur and Kurukshetra University, India
Dr. Xiaoxiao Zhou, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Prof. Rajendra Prasad Mahapatra, SRM University, India
Prof. Shishir K.Shandilya, Rukmani Devi Institute of Science and
Technology, India
Dean, Prof. G.Selvakumar, School of Electrical Sciences, V.M.K.V.
Engineering College, India
Prof. Xuesong Zhang, Claremont Graduate University, USA
Prof. Sarat Kumar Patra, National Institute of Technology Rourkela,
Preface
Organizing Committee
ABSTRACT
A huge number of information is available nowadays and it keeps increasing
every day. As such, the need for recommender system to recommend relevant
items or information is in high demand. Furthermore, recommender system is
expected to deliver relevant items from a trustable source. In this paper, we
proposed a new trust calculation that is incorporated into a hybrid recommender
system. Our new trust calculation is calculated based on user’s score in a
particular system, and its potential implementation is demonstrated through a
prototype design.
KEY WORDS
Recommender System, Hybrid Filtering, Trust
1. INTRODUCTION
A huge amount of information available either on the Internet or in
databases, has led to a difficulty for users to locate relevant items in a short
period of time [7]. As such, users have to spend time browsing and filtering the
information they need. One way to overcome this problem is by using
recommender system. Recommender system is a software that helps user to find
interesting items from a huge amount of items. Recommender system
recommends items based on item similarity or user similarity or the combination
of both [1]. Even though, recommender systems have been widely used to
recommend items, often the recommended items may not be recommended from
the trusted user. Trust in recommender system can be defined as a user’s
recommendation that can be relied on. As a result trust plays an important role to
filter out the reliable source of recommendation [2].
In this paper, we proposed a new calculation for trust that can be
incorporated into a hybrid recommender system. The proposed trust calculation
is based on averaging user’s score on a particular system domain. Our proposed
method ensures that the trust calculation is not solely based on user rating about
other users but taking into account the user’s performance such as the user
performance in quizzes or the user track record in buying and purchasing items.
The objective of this study is to propose a generalized calculation of trust for a
hybrid filtering recommender system that uses user’s score to calculate trust.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Chapter 2 explains the
filtering techniques used in recommender system as well the recent works in
trust recommender system. Chapter 3 elaborates on the proposed trust in hybrid
recommender system. These include the explanation on the proposed framework,
the calculation of hybrid filtering technique, and the trust calculation. The
sample prototype of the proposed trust in hybrid recommender system is shown
1
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
in Chapter 4. Finally, the last chapter provides the concluding remarks along
with suggestion for future work.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Nowadays information overload has becoming one of the biggest problems
in the computer world. One way to solve information overload problem is by
using recommender system. Recommender system filters and recommends
relevant items to users based on either user profile, item profile or the
combination of both. Recommender system is divided into three techniques that
are content-based filtering, collaborative filtering, and hybrid filtering [1].
Content-based filtering technique recommends items based on similar items
that user like in the past. Item similarity is calculated by analyzing item’s
content or keywords overlaps between two items. All the items are then ranked
according to the similarity value and the recommender system will select Top-N
similar items to be recommended to the user. Among the popular methods to
calculate the item similarity are vector space model (VSM) and k-nearest
neighbor (kNN).
Contrast to content-based filtering technique, collaborative filtering
technique recommends items based on recommendation by similar users. User
similarity is calculated by comparing user feedback such as ratings given to
items. Based on the user similarity value, the top-N similar users will
recommend the highly rated items to the user [3]. Among the popular method to
calculate user similarity is Pearson Correlation Coefficient.
Both content-based filtering and collaborative filtering techniques have their
own disadvantages. For example, content-based filtering technique only
recommends similar characteristics items, and thus other interesting items that
have dissimilar characteristics are not able to be recommended. On the other
hand, collaborative filtering technique is not able to produce recommendation
when user has not rated the items. Hybrid filtering technique can be used to
solve the problems associated with both content-based and collaborative filtering
techniques. Hybrid filtering technique combines both content-based filtering and
collaborative filtering techniques by combining the rating prediction, adding
characteristics of collaborative filtering technique into content-based filtering
technique, adding characteristics of content-based filtering technique into
collaborative filtering technique, and creating a single unifying model that
incorporates both techniques’ characteristics [1].
While recommender system has been widely used to recommend relevant
items, there are many issues discussed regarding the recommended items and the
“trusted” user who provide the recommendation [6]. The idea of using “trust” in
recommender systems come from the fact that people always habitually rely on
trustable opinion of other people. Trustable recommendation in recommender
systems is expected to meet user needs and increase quality of recommender
Systems [2]. Few researchers have proposed a method to calculate trust in
recommender system. [4] proposed a trust-awareness recommender system in
which the trust is calculated based on rating given by user about other user. For
example user B will be rated by user A base on usefulness of user B. In [4]
proposed method, a trust network is used to show a trust statement, and a trust
metric is used to propagate trust over the trust network. Similar like [4], the
proposed method used by [5] uses rating to calculate trust. [5] proposed
2
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
computing Profile Level Trust and Item Level Trust. In [5] proposed method,
Profile Level Trust is the percentage of correct recommendations that user has
contributed while Item Level Trust is a profile level trust that depends on a
specific item. Contrast to [4] and [5] methods, the method proposed by [2]
represents trust model by computing trust based on the combination of trust
level and reputation in which both of them can have a different weight. In [2]
model, trust level shows the level of trust base on user past experience. The trust
level is dynamic over the time and the trust level can be lower or higher
depending on user interaction. Reputation in [2] is determined by observing or
retrieving information about the user’s past behavior and evaluation by other
users at a given time.
3
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
In our proposed method, we used Pearson Correlation Coefficient to
calculate the user similarity. The equation for user similarity is given as follow
where X and Y are the pair ratings given by user X and user Y.
For the calculation of item similarity, we used VSM to calculate the
similarity. VSM involves two phases of calculation, that are to calculate the term
weight (TFIDF) and cosine similarity. In TFIDF, all the terms are treated as
independent terms. The equation is defined as follows
f i, j ⎛D⎞
wi , j = * log⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
maxz f z , j ⎝ di ⎠
f max z f z , j
where i , j denotes the frequency of term i occurring in document j, is
the maximum frequency among all the z keywords that appear in document j, D
is the total number of documents that can be recommended to a learner, and d i is
the number of documents that contain term i.
The term weight obtained from TFIDF calculation is used to calculate the
similarity value between two documents. The relevancy rankings of the
documents are measured based on the deviation angles between two document
vectors that can be calculated using cosine similarity as follows
4. PROTOTYPE
The prototype of the proposed recommender system is based on three-tier
architecture. Three-tier architecture is consisted of presentation, logic, and data
tier. The presentation tier is the top level of the architecture which presents
information to user such as mandatory learning materials and additional
(suggested) learning materials. On the other hand, logic tier makes a decision on
the learning materials that need to be recommended based on the viewed
learning material. Finally, data tier is used to store information such as user
ratings and item attributes. Fig 1 illustrates the prototype of an e-learning system
that used the proposed trust recommender system. All the mandatory learning
materials are shown in the top-left column while the viewed learning material is
shown in the top-right column. The average rating of the viewed item given by
other learners is shown in label A. Based on the viewed learning material, the
proposed recommender system generates a list of suggested learning materials
as shown in label C. The e-learning system provides link to quiz questions to
4
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
evaluate the learner’s knowledge as shown in label B. The quiz score is in turn
use by the proposed recommender system to calculate trust.
5. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have proposed a trust calculation that can be incorporated
in a hybrid filtering recommender system. Our proposed method utilizes the
existing system infrastructure used by the user either to sit for an evaluation or
received assessment by other users. The outcome of the evaluation or the
assessment by other users is then used to calculate the trust of a particular user.
The prototype of the trust in hybrid recommender system is currently being
tested with an e-learning system and the performance analysis as well as
benchmarking is scheduled for the future work.
REFERENCES
[1] Adomavicius, G., & Tuzhilin, A. (2005). Toward the Next Generation of Recommender Systems:
A Survey of the State-of-the-Art and Possible Extensions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge
and Data Engineering, 17(6), 734-749.
[2] Azzedin, F., & Maheswaran, M. (2002). Towards Trust-Aware Resource Management in Grid
Computing Systems. 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the
Grid, Berlin, Germany, 452-457.
[3] Massa, P., & Avesani, P. (2004). Trust-Aware Collaborative Filtering for Recommender Systems.
On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2004, LNCS 3290, Springer-Verlag, 492-508.
[4] Massa, P., & Bhattacharjee, B. (2004). Using Trust in Recommender Systems: An Experimental
Analysis. Trust Management, LNCS 2995, Springer-Verlag, 221-235.
[5] O'Donovan, J., & Smyth, B. (2005). Trust in Recommender Systems. Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, San Diego, California, 167-174.
[6] Vozalis, E., & Margaritis, K. G. (2003). Analysis of Recommender Systems’ Algorithms.
Proceedings of the 6th Hellenic-European Conference on Computer Mathematics and its
Application, Athens, Greece.
[7] Ghauth, K. I., & Abdullah, N. A. (2010). Learning materials recommendation using good
learners’ ratings and content-based filtering. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 58(6), 711-727.
[8] Ghauth, K. I., & Abdullah, N. A. (2010). Measuring learner’s performance in e-learning
recommender systems. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 764-774.
[9] Cabral, L., & Hortacsu, A. (2010). The Dynamic of Seller Reputation: Evidence from eBay. The
Journal of Industrial Economics, 58(1), 54-78.
5
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
TO-BE-RECORDED ANALYSIS
INSIDE DERIVATIVE CODE COMPILER
ABSTRACT
Algorithmic Differentiation (AD) is applied to numerical simulation programs in
order to produce code for the computation of various kinds of derivatives. A
data flow analysis called To-Be-Recorded (TBR) analysis aims to detect the set
of variables required in reverse section and values that can be lost because of the
overwriting in forward section for adjoint mode of AD. The implementation of
the TBR analysis uses a syntax-directed algorithm based on the following
attribute grammar. The expected result of TBR analysis is to get more efficient
generated code in terms of memory. We have implemented TBR analysis inside
our AD-tool called “Derivative Code Compiler (DCC)”. Depending on the
testing cases, the percentage of memory savings can be different. In the test case
illustrated in this paper, a memory saving of approximately 18% was achieved.
KEY WORDS
algorithmic differentiation, adjoint mode, to-be-recorded, derivative code
compiler
1 INTRODUCTION
AD is a family of methods for obtaining the derivatives of functions
computed by a program. There are two methods in AD, tangent linear mode and
adjoint mode. The tangent linear mode combines partial derivatives starting with
the input variables and propagating forward to the output variables. Moreover,
the adjoint mode combines partial derivatives starting with the output variables
and propagating backward to the input variables (see [2] for a detailed
discussion).
An implementation of algorithmic differentiation is the DCC, developed by
LuFG Informatik 12, Software and Tools for Computational Engineering
(STCE), RWTH Aachen.
The DCC allows the application of AD by code transformation. It
transforms the original code for y = F(x) into adjoint code (y, x(1), y(1)) = F(1)(x,
x(1),y(1)) for computing
y= F ( x)
x(1)+(∇ F (x ))(T ) . y (1)
y(1)=0
For given adjoints of a dependent and independent variables reverse mode
AD propagates adjoints backward through the Single Assignment Code (SAC). In
7
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
SAC, all left hand-side (LHS) variables are assigned only once and cannot appear
as LHS anywhere else in the code.
for j= n+ 1,. .., n+ p+ m
v j= x j (v i )i< j
for i< j and j= n+ p+ m ,... , n+ 1
∂x
v (1)i = v(1)i+ v (1) j⋅ j (v k )k < j
∂ vi
Equation (1)
The v(1)j are assumed to be initialized to y(1)j for j=n+p+1,...,n+p+m and to
zero for j=1,...,n+p. A forward evaluation of SAC is performed to compute all
intermediate variables whose values are required which values are required for
the adjoint propagation in reverse order. The elemental function in SAC are
processed in reverse order in the second part of Equation (1).
SAC’s are not built explicitly in practice. Approaches ensuring the
mathematical equivalence of the adjoint code to Equation (1) are taken instead.
The correctness of the arguments of all local partial derivatives in Equation (1)
is ensured by pushing original values of overwritten program variables (LHS of
assignments) onto a so called data flow reversal stack during an augmented
evaluation of the program (in the augmented forward section of the adjoint code
corresponding to the first loop in Equation (1) followed by restoring these values
prior to the evaluation of the corresponding adjoint assignments in the reverse
section of the adjoint code corresponding to the second loop in Equation (1).
The correctness of the adjoints in Equation (1) is ensured by setting the
adjoints of program variables on LHS of assignments to zero after the evaluation
of the corresponding assignments. Adjoint of local variables that are neither
inputs nor outputs of the given routine need to be initialized to zero.
To generate the derivative code, we extend all possible assignments with an
additional assignment, which calculates the derivative of the original allocation.
Every variable can be divided into active and passive. A variable is called active
if it depends on an independence variable and this variable affects a dependent
variable. Otherwise, it is called passive [2]. Therefore, we only need to extend
active variables to get a more efficient code generated and this division is done
by the activity analysis (see [6] for a detailed discussion). In addition, we also
need the stack to store the values which need to be saved prior to being
overwritten in adjoint mode. Again, this is not an efficient way (in terms of
memory) because we only need to store the value which is used in reverse
section. Therefore, TBR analysis [5] is needed to determine which variables
needed to stored in the stack.
Figure 2 shows a function with variables x as the independent variable and y
as the dependent variable. Without TBR analysis, it assumes all the assignments
to be active, meaning that all left-hand side program variables need to be
recorded. Figure 3 shows the code generation without TBR analysis for the
function f.c in adjoint mode.
8
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
1 double x, y, a, q;
2
3 q=a∗ a;
4 a=sin(x∗ y);
5 y=a ∗q;
Fig.3 Code generation of function f.c Fig.4 Code generation of function f.c
without TBR analysis with TBR analysis
9
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
approximations is the best approach for generating information to obtain safe
results.
Data flow analysis depends on the internal representation of programs, as
discussed in classical literature on compiler theory (see, in particular, [1]). Data
flow analysis attempts to obtain particular information at each point in a
procedure. In principles, each point has entry state (-) and exit state (+).
B. TBR Analysis
TBR analysis aims to detect the set of variables used in reverse section and
values that can be lost because of being overwritten in forward section.
Therefore, we can decide which values to be recorded in forward section.
AdjU(n) is the set of variables that used in the adjoint code or reverse
section associated with a non-terminal n, we can define as :
{
a :V =e AdjU (e)∖ { V } ,if active (e)
∅ ,if ¬active
for non-linear operation, we only consider multiplication as the one of that
operation. Division are decomposed according to :
a
= a . rec(b)
b
and where the unary function rec(b) is covered by production rule (P6).
AdjU analysis for Semantic Language (SL) programs can be implemented
as a syntax-directed algorithm based on the following attribute grammar [6]:
(P4) e l :e r1 L e r2 (P6 ) e l : F (e r) , (rec∈ F )
Var (e l )= Var(e r1)∪Var (er2 ) Var (e l )= Var (e r)
AdjU (e l )=AdjU (e r1)∪ AdjU(e r2 ) Var (e l )= Var (e r)
{
Var (e rl )
if active (e r1 )∧active(e r2 ) (P8) e : C
r1 r2
AdjU (e l )= AdjU (e )∪ Var(e ) Var (e)=∅
if active (e )∧¬active (e r2 )
r1
AdjU (e)=∅
Var (e r1 )∪AdjU (e r2)
if ¬active(e r1 )∧active (e r2)
where
{
true ,
active (e)= if ∃v ∈Var(e): v∈Active(−a)
false ,
otherwise
and a denotes the assignment containing e as a sub-expression of its right-hand
side.
Next, we collect information about the set of variables that can be
overwritten (LHS variables) inside the given code fragment, define as Kill.
a: V = e Kill
a:= V
10
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Kill analysis for SL programs can be implemented as a syntax-directed
algorithm based on the following attribute grammar [6]:
(P1) s :(a∣b∣l) (P9) b : IF (r ){s}
Kill( s)=Kill (a∣b∣l) Kill(b)= Kill(s )
AdjU (s)=AdjU (a∣b∣l ) AdjU (b)=AdjU (s)
l r
(P2) s :(a∣b∣l ) s (P10) l :WHILE (r ){s}
l r
Kill( s )= Kill(a∣b∣l )∪AdjU (s ) Kill(l )= Kill(s )
l r r
AdjU (s )=AdjU (a∣b∣l) \ Kill(s )∪AdjU (s ) AdjU (l )=AdjU (s)
After the set of required variables used within the reverse section of the
ajdoint upstream code is propagated (AdjU) and the set of variables that can be
overwritten (Kill). Therefore, Req is needed to build the set of variables that can
be overwritten and also needed in reverse mode, where Req(-n)/Req(+n) denotes
the set of required variable right before/after the code fragment corresponding to
a non-terminal n.
Req analysis for SL programs can be implemented as a syntax-directed
algorithm based on the following attribute grammar [6]:
11
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
The time is spent a lot in activity analysis, because we need a fixed-point
iteration for each loop node (see [6] for a detailed discussion) and as explained
previously, we need the activity information for each variable to carry out the
TBR analysis. Based on Table 1, the implementation of the TBR analysis only
needs 12 seconds of the total time.
Tab.1 comparison of memory usage, number of assignments and generating time
Generating
Counter Size of Number of
Analysis Time
of Stack Stack assignments
(DCC)
- 6126 49008 bytes 76887 5 seconds
8 minutes, 27
Activity 6126 49008 bytes 74325
seconds
8 minutes, 39
Activity + TBR 5044 40352 bytes 69937
seconds
REFERENCES
[1] A. Aho, M. Lam, R. Sethi, and J. Ulman. Compilers. Principles Techniques, and Tools (Second
Edition). Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2007.
[2] C. H. Bischof, P. D.Hovland, and B. Norris. On the Implementation of Automatic Differentiation
Tools. ACM/SIGPLAN Workshop Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program
Manipulation, 2002.
[3] A. Griewank and A. Walter. Evaluating Derivatives. Principles and Techniques of Algorithmic
Differentiation (Second Edition). SIAM, Philadelphia, 2008.
[4] A. Griewank and A. Walther. Implementation of Check Pointing for the Reverse or Adjoint
Mode of Computational Differentiation. Technical report, Institute of Scientific Computing,
Technical University Dresden, 2000.
[5] L. Hascӧet, U. Naumann, and V. Pascual. “To Be Recorded” Analysis in Reverse-Mode
Automatic Differentiation. Future Generation Computer Systems, 21:1401–1417, 2005.
[6] U. Naumann. Derivative Code Compilers. LuFG Informatik 12: Software and Tools for
Computational Engineering, Department of Computer Science -RWTH Aachen University D-
52056 Aachen, Germany.
[7] M. Fӧrster. Verification of Data Dependencies in Derivative Code. Master's thesis, Software &
Tools for Computational Engineering, RWTH Aachen, 2009.
12
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
ADOPTING DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE TO ENHANCE LEXICAL
CHAIN FOR UNSUPERVISED WORD SENSE DISAMBIGUATION
ABSTRACT
This paper represents an idea of integrating approaches for disambiguating the
word sense of a text. It combines two knowledge sources of Word Sense
Disambiguation (WSD) approaches so that a better approach to be introduced to
WSD research area. The Lexical Chain approach will be adopted together with
the Domain knowledge to define word meaning. In order to show the efficiency
of the adopting another approach, the Lexical Chain approach will be discussed
in details so that the weakness of this approach could be covered by adopting the
domain knowledge. The result proved that by adopting the domain knowledge
into Lexical Chain approach increased the performance.
KEY WORDS
Word Sense Disambiguation, Lexical Chain, Domain, Wordnet 2.0
1. INTRODUCTION
Lexical chain is a process of relating words semantically by creating chains
that represent different lexical cohesion through the text [11]. It will
automatically find relations between words through the semantic relationships
that defined in machine readable dictionaries.
Lexical chain was first introduced by Morris and Hirst [7] to identify the
structure of text using the relations between words. This approach chained the
related words in the text according to the categories, index entries and pointers
in Roget Thesaurus. Morris and Hirst argued that since lexical cohesion is a
result of a unit text that related about a topic, hence each word should contribute
a certain weight to each other. However, due to the lack of machine readable
dictionary, Morris and Hirst forced to generate the chain manually, by hand.
After the release of WordNet [3], a number of Word Sense Disambiguation
(WSD) researches [4, 5, 11] focusing on lexical chain were done over the years.
Hirst and St-Onge [5] first implemented the lexical approach using WordNet. In
this approach, there are three types of relation between words which are defined
as extra-strong (word and its repetition), strong (related by Wordnet semantic
relations) and medium-strong relations (the synset related to words is more than
one level in taxonomy). Different weights are assigned to the chain according to
the type of relation that related the words. However, this approach applied greed
disambiguation process where the sense of the words was defined at the moment
when it was inserted into the chain, which may lead to misinterpretations works.
Hence Barzilay and Elhadad [12] proposed a non-greedy lexical chain
approach which finds every possible relation that related between synsets of the
words. It employed the global strategy where only the highest scoring lexical
chains taken to define the senses of words. However, this approach does not
13
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
applied linear time concept which is then lead to exponential number of lexical
chain words [8].
Silber and McCoy [6], Galley and McKeown [11], and Chen et.al [8]
proposed a linear time lexical chain based on Barzilay and Elhadad works. Their
approaches can be decomposed into three steps, which is collecting the senses of
every candidate words, then finding relations between the candidate words
through the semantic relations that defined in WordNet, and lastly building a
lexical chain and select the highest scoring lexical chain to define the senses.
Chen et.al approach performed the best among the other two linear time
lexical chain mentioned before. This approach will be described in next section
as a work based on that approach is done here.
Daniel personally led the fight for the measure, which he had watered down
considerably since its rejection by two previous Legislatures, in a public hearing
before the House Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Under committee rules,
it went automatically to a subcommittee for one week.
14
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
and the type of semantic relation established. In this approach, Chen et.al [8]
synset weighting idea, lexical stability was adopted. Lexical stability is a
measurement of weighting the synsets belong a word to define the reliability
word sense. The reliable of the word sense depends on the polysemy rate of the
word.
The lexical stability is calculated using Formula (1) [8] where i represents
the i-th word sense of word w and |w| represents the number of senses of the
word. Therefore, the higher number of senses of a word, the lexical stability of
the word sense getting lower. For every sense of the candidate word, the lexical
stability will be calculated.
1
1
1 log| |
The weight of each semantic edge that established was calculated by using
Formula (2). Given the i-th sense of the target word, wp, is related with j-th sense
of the neighbor word, wq, the semantic edge weight score, will be
calculated by multiplying their lexical stability with rk which denotes the weight
of the semantic relation which shown in Table 1[8]. The relation weight scheme
varies according to the type of the semantic relations and also the distance
between words. The further the distance between two words, the smaller weight
is assigning to the semantic edge and prevent the words link from too far away
in the text. Window size denotes the distance between words.
After computing all sense semantic edge scores, summing the semantic edge
weight scores with each sense of the every candidate word, the sense with the
highest sense score will be taken as the most likely sense in that particular text.
Tab.1 Semantic Relations Weight Scheme
Semantic Relation window size ≤ 20 20 < window size ≤ 40
synonym 1.5 1.0
hypernym 0.9 0.4
hyponym 1.2 0.5
holonymy & meronymy 0.9 0.4
other relations 0.7 0.2
15
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
In order to prevent the words related to each other with high level synset in
Wordnet noun taxonomy, researchers tended to restrict the level of sense
hierarchy for mapping. In fact, Chen et.al [8] proved that by limiting the sense
depth to one, it gave the best result of lexical approach. With smaller sense
depth, the relation that established between words are more reliable because the
distance between related words closer in the Wordnet noun taxonomy.
Even though the sense of level was restricted as one, lexical chain
approaches still facing a problem in defining the semantic likely between related
words. Hence domain knowledge is applied here as a decision point of the
semantic relation that established between words since domains show another
way of semantic relation between words.
In this approach, for every related synset, the domains of both synsets of the
target word and the related word will be retrieved and compared. If both words
are annotated as the same domain group, it denotes the semantic relation
between both words is giving a higher reliable than those words that shared
same synset but annotated as different domain group.
For instance, committee#1 was annotated as domain label
ADMINISTRATION and the domain label for subcommittee#1 also annotated as
domain label ADMINISTRATION, therefore this chain remains in the WSD
process. However, for legislature#1 and public#2 which were annotated as
POLITICS and FACTOTUM are discriminated from the chain.
Formula (3) is an extension version of semantic scheme weighting method
from Function (2) which involving domain score, , (which can
calculate by using Formula (4)) as decision point maker. Given D denotes the
domain label, Dom(s) denotes the domain set of the synset as one synset could
have been annotated more than just one domain label. Notice that if the related
words were annotated as domain label FACTOTUM by Wordnet domain, the
semantic edge weight will be assigned as zero and the relation is discriminated
3
Wordnet categorized the Noun, Verb, Adjective and Adverd into four different Syntactic
Categories. These categories do not interact to each other.
16
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
from the lexical chain. Domain label FACTOTUM is a general domain label for
the synsets which cannot be annotated to any other domain group in Wordnet.
Hence domain label FACTOTUM can be seen like a “placeholder” for all other
domain labels [1]. Therefore even the same synset shared, it does not prove the
reliability of the relation.
Finally, sense score will be calculated by using Formula (2) with the
semantic edge weight measured by Formula (3).
, ,
3
0,
1
, , 4
| |
3. EVALUATION RESULT
In this section, several experimenting results of the proposed approach will
be discussed. The testing is carried out by using the concordance corpus,
SemCor4 which is extracted from the Brown Corpus.
In order to perform a comparison between other lexical chain approaches,
Chen et.al approach was implemented. The reason of picking on Chen et.al is
because among all the proposed lexical chain approaches, Chen et.al method
produced the best result.
However unlike Chen et.al approach, the proposed approach is only mainly
focus on disambiguating noun only. In the task of disambiguating, the proposed
approach is discussed without domain, and with domains for disambiguates the
noun. Table 3 shows the results of each of the approaches.
As shown in Table 3, the accuracy of disambiguating increased when the
domain knowledge was adopted into the convention lexical chain approach.
Hence it proved by adopting domain as a decision factor relief the noise of the
reliable of the semantic between words and improves the approach.
During the experiment, if domain score was taken only as a contribution to
the semantic edge score and without discriminating the semantic relation, the
accuracy drops if compared to the proposed method, but still slightly better than
Chen et.al approach.
Tab.3 Semantic Relations Weight Scheme
Approach % Approach %
Chen et.al 67.5 Proposed Method with Domain 72.8
Proposed Method 69.2 Proposed Method with Domain (no discrimination5) 68.2
4
SemCor corpus is available on this website, http://www.cse.unt.edu/~rada/downloads.html.
SemCor is a composition of 352 documents, in which 186 documents are tagged with all the
information (noun, verb, adjective, and adverb), while 166 documents are only tagged for verb only.
5
This approach does not discriminate any member of the chain. The domain score only acts as a
supporting score to the chain.
17
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
4. CONCLUSION
In this paper, an enhanced version of unsupervised WSD approach was
proposed and the result of disambiguation process was increased significantly.
By simply adopting the domain knowledge of each synset that provided by
Wordnet into the lexical chain approach, the noise that interferences the
reliability of the semantic relation was much discriminated, and a better
performance of noun disambiguating process was introduced.
However, in this approach, the domain was taken without checking the
reliability of the domain to be assigned to the particular word. The reliability of
the domain depends on the text domain and the context words. In the future,
more reliable of domain score should be calculated instead of only taking
account the distance of words as proposed above.
REFERENCES
[1] A.Cliozzo, B.Magnini, and C.Strapparava, “Unsupervised domain relevance estimation for word
sense disambiguation”, SENSEVAL-2 Second International Workshop on Evaluating Word
Sense Disambiguation System. Toulose, France: in press, 2001.
[2] B.Magnini, C.Strapparava, G.Pezzulo, and A.Gliozzo, “Using Domain Information for Word
Sense Disambiguation,” In Proceeding of Senseval-2 Workshop, Association of Computational
Linguistics, pp. 111-115. Toulouse, France, 2002.
[3] C.Fellbaum, Wordnet: An Electronic Lexical Database, The MIT Press, 1998.
[4] F.Vasilescu, P.Langlais, G.Lapalme, “Evaluating Variants of the Lesk Approach for
Disambiguating Words,” In Proceeding of the Conference of Language Resource and
Evaluations (LREC 2004), 2004.
[5] G.Hirst, D.S.O. , “Lexical Chains as Representation of Context for the Detection and Correction
of Malapropisms,” In Christian Fellbeum,editor, Wordnet:An Electronic Lexical Database, pp
305-332. The MIT Press, 2004.
[6] H.G.Silber, K.F.McCoy, “Efficiently Computed Lexical Chains As an Intermediate
Representation for Automatic Text Summarization,” Association for Computational
Linguistics , pp. 487-496, 2002.
[7] J.Morris, G.Hirst, “Lexical Chains As Representation of Context for the Detection of the
Structure of Text,” Computational Linguistics , pp. 21-48, 1991.
[8] J.P.Chen, J.Liu, W.Yu, P.Wu, “Combining Lexical Stability and Improved Lexical Chain for
Unsupervised Word Sense Disambiguation,” Second International Symposium on Knowledge
Acquisition and Modeling, 2009.
[9] L.Bentivogli, P.Forner, B.Magini, E.Pianta, “Revisiting the Wordnet Domain Hierarchy:
Semantic, Coverage and Balancing,” COLING 2004 Workshop on "Multilingual Linguistic
Resources", 2004 .
[10] M.Brunzel, M.Spiliopoulou, “Domain Relevance on Term Weighting. Natural Language
Processing and Information Systems” , pp. 427-432, 2007.
[11] M.Galley, K.McKeown, “Improving Word Sense Disambiguation in Lexical Chain,” In
Proceeding of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2003).
Acapulco, Mexico, 2003.
[12] R.Barzilay, M.Elhadad, “Using Lexical Chains for Text Summarization,” In Proceeding of the
ACL Workshop on Intelligent Scalable Text Summarization, 1997.
18
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
WORD AND SPEAKER RECOGNITION SYSTEM ON MATLAB
ABSTRACT
A system which combines user dependent Word Recognition and text dependent
speaker recognition is described. Word recognition is the process of converting
an audio signal, captured by a microphone, to a word. Voice Activity Detection
(VAD), Spectral Subtraction (SS), Mel-Frequency Cepstrum Coefficient
(MFCC), Vector Quantization (VQ), Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) and k-
Nearest Neighbour (k-NN) are methods used in word recognition part of the
project to implement using MATLAB software. For Speaker Recognition part,
Vector Quantization (VQ) is used. The recognition rate for word and speaker
recognition system that was successfully implemented is 87.04% for word
recognition while for speaker recognition is 64.81%.
KEY WORDS
Word Recognition, Speaker Recognition, Voice Activity Detection, Spectral
Subtraction, Mel-Frequency Cepstrum Coefficient, Dynamic Time Warping, k-
Nearest Neighbour, Vector Quantization
1. INTRODUCTION
By using speech to communicate in our daily life, it becomes very simple
until humans tend to forget how inconsistent a signal speech is. Word and
Speaker recognitions are becoming more and more important in allowing or
denying access to restrict data or facilities [1]. Word recognition system is a
system that recognizes a word. Speaker recognition system is a system that
recognizes who the speaker is. Word recognition means that the computer can
take dictation but do not understand what is being said. Speaker recognition is
related to Speech recognition [2]. Instead of determine what was said, it finds
out who said it.
2. BACKGROUND STUDY
There are five main components that are needed to be passed through to
recognize a word as shown in Figure 1. First, a reference speech patterns are
stored as speech template which is called database. At another side, a speaker
speaks to a microphone and linked with an analog-to-digital converter to
digitally encode the raw speech waveform. Then, the program performs
recognition to separate speech from non-speech after that speech improvement
by reducing noise and followed by feature extraction. Then, the preprocessed
signal is used for the recognition algorithm. Once the users’ speech sample is
preprocessed by MATLAB, the users’ speech is compared to the stored
reference patterns. Lastly, the best match is chosen from the pattern matching
algorithm which computes a measurement between the preprocessed signal of
the users’ speech and the entire stored database [2].
19
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Figure 1. How the Word Being Recognized [2]
Every human has different voice vocal. Using this important property, we
are able to recognize a friend over a telephone. No matter how we mimic the
voice of someone, there are still some different in energy, pronunciation and etc.
Speaker recognition is the process of recognizing who is the speaker based on
the individual information included in speech waves.
Speaker Recognition can be grouped in two categories: Speaker
Identification and Speaker Verification. Speaker identification is a process of
finding the person’s identity by matching the speech pattern on a set of known
speaker’s voice in the database [3]. The system will choose the best matching
speaker. Speaker verification is a process of accept or reject the person’s voice
compare with the voice in the database. Speaker identification with text-
dependent is a method where the speakers are required to speak a specific word
while speaker identification with text-independent method speaker is not
required to speak a specific word.
Speaker identification text-dependent is described. Figure 2 shows the
basic structure of speaker identification. In speaker identification, M speaker
models are examined at the same time. The most likely one is chosen and the
decision will be one of the speaker’s ID in the database, or will be “none of the
above” if and only if the matching score is below some threshold.
20
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
3. PROBLEM STATEMENT
There are a lot of existing word recognition or speaker recognition
standalone systems, however there are little research on combined word and
speaker recognition. With the word and speaker recognition system, security
feature using speaker recognition can be implemented on top of word
recognition-based applications.
5. METHODOLOGY
First of all, for the whole recognition system the first step is to record the
voices of the user for the systems. In this work, there are voices from 6 speakers,
four female and two male while the word tested are: “One”, “Two”, “Three”,
“Four”, “Five, “Six”, “Seven,”, “Eight” and “Nine”. This database is kept in a
folder name Train. This step is called enrolment phase. Enrolment phase is to get
the speaker models or voiceprints for speaker database. For almost all the
recognition systems, training is the first step. After a month or longer, the voices
of these speakers are recorded again and kept in a folder name Test. These sound
files were recorded to take into account the many changes that may occur in a
speaker’s voice, for example health, time and etc.
When the speaker speaks to the microphone, MATLAB reads the .wav
audio file using “wavread”. The program performs front-end processing, VAD
then MFCC to get the coefficient. The MFCC coefficients are then put into its
respective cell. The task is repeated for a number of times depending on the
number of audio file samples (number of speakers) for the particular word. The
cell is saved as .mat file for later processing. These are the processes of building
a database. In the recording steps for training database, a silent environment is
required to make sure the database produced with as minimal noise and
interferences as possible.
For this work, the system will first recognize the word and from the word
the speaker uttered, the system will look for the speaker. The audio
authentication process contains two processing stages: Front-end preprocessing
for feature extraction consists of Voice Activity Detection (VAD) to crop out the
voice part of the signal referring to the paper from L. R. Rabiner [4], Spectral
Subtraction (SS) to enhance the signal and reduce noise referring to the paper
from S. F. Boll [5], and Mel-Cepstrum Coefficient (MFCC) to get the
coefficients of the signals referring to the paper written by Md. Rashidul Hasan
[6]. Whereas the back-end processing consists of Dynamic Time Warping
(DTW) from P.Senin [7] and M.W. Kadous [8], k-Nearest Neighbour (k-NN), as
21
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
well as Vector Quantization (VQ) from M.N.Do [9] and Sookpotharom [10].
They are all used to obtain the end results of word and speaker recognition.
Recognition Rate
Word Recognition
VQ 70.37%
DTW 81.84%
VQ + DTW 87.04%
Speaker Recognition
VQ 42.59%
22
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
DTW 38.89%
Word & Speaker Recognition
Word Recognition (VQ + DTW) 87.04%
Speaker Recognition (VQ) 64.81% (Improved)
REFERENCES
[1] M. R.Schroeder, “ Computer Speech Technology”. Second Edition, Boston New York, 1999.PP
41-45.
[2] R. D. Peacocke, “An Introduction to Speech and Speaker Recognition”. IEEE Press, Bell
Northern Research, 1990. PP 26-33 .
[3] T.W Keong, “Speaker Recognition” [Online]. Available:
sst.unisim.edu.sg:8080/dspace/.../314/.../09_Thang%20Wee%20Keong.doc [Accessed: Sept. 13,
2010]
[4] L.R.Rabiner, “An Algorithm for Determining the Endpoints of Isolated Utterances”. The Bell
System Technical Journal, Ferbruary 1975.PP 297-315.
[5] S. F. Boll, “Suppression of Acoustic Noise in Speech Using Spectral Subtraction” in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. on Acoustics, speech, and signal processing, Apr. 1979, vol. 27. PP 113.
[6] Md. Rashidul Hasan, Mustafa Jamil, Md. Golam Rabbani, Md. Saifur Rahman. "Speaker
Identification using Mel Frequency cepstral coefficients". 3rd International Conference on
Electrical & Computer Engineering ICECE 2004, 28-30 December 2004, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[7] P. Senin, “Dynamic Time Warping Algorithm Review”. Information and Computer Science
Department, University of Hawaii, USA, December 2008. PP 3-9
[8] M.W. Kadous, “Dynamic Time Warping”, [Online]. Available:
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~waleed/phd/html/node38.html [Accessed: Oct,9 2010].
[9] M. N. Do, Digital Signal Processing Mini-Project: An Automatic Speaker Recognition System.
Available: http://lcavwww.epfl.ch/~minhdo/asr_project/ [Accessed: March, 23 2011]
[10] Sookpotharom, S. Manas "Codebook Design Algorithm for Classified Vector Quantization".
Bangkok University, Pathumtani, Thailand, 2000. PP 751-753.
23
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
DHTCACHE: A NOVEL STRUCTURED P2P-BASED
COOPERATIVE WEB CACHING SYSTEM
ABSTRACT
Current P2P Web cache is analyzed and a structured P2P-based cooperative web
caching system, namely DHTCache, is proposed. The underlying P2P routing
mechanism of DHTCache uses SA-Chord and the upper cache positioning
mechanism uses the URL-pathed index and lookup scheme. In this way, not
only performance problems caused by the heterogeneity among P2P nodes is
overcame, but also the characteristics of Web users to access is combined.
Simulations show that compared to the previous solutions, DHTCache can
achieve better lookup performance.
KEY WORDS
lookup, P2P, cache
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, Peer-to-Peer[1][2][3][4] technique is fast developed. P2P
technique has many merits in nature, for example, scalable, self-organizing, etc.
So, P2P client-end caching, have been proposed to utilize P2P technique to
improve client-end caching efficiency. These solutions can be categorized into
two types according to underlying P2P, unstructured P2P-based cooperative
caching system and structured P2P-based cooperative caching system. The
search performance of unstructured P2P system is better on the object of high
interest, degraded on the lower object, and some object in the system can even
not be found. These problems can be overcome by the structured P2P system.
But in the current structured P2P-based cooperative caching system, there is not
combination of the characteristics of Web users to access, and there are still
some problems, such as, a large overhead, low lookup performance, etc.
To solve the above problem, by analysis, the performance of P2P-based
cooperative caching system is directly determined by the underlying P2P routing
mechanism and the upper cache positioning mechanism. The organization form
of the underlying P2P system will directly affect the cache hit rate and response
delay. So, the SA-Chord[5], proposed in our previous work, is selected as the
underlying P2P routing mechanism of DHTCache. The nodes in SA-Chord can
dynamically adjust their routing table according to their resources status. So the
performance problem caused by the heterogeneity among P2P nodes is
overcome. In addition, to combine the characteristics of Web user to access, the
URL-pathed index and lookup scheme, proposed in PBCache[6] (a previous
work), is selected as the upper cache positioning mechanism. The performance
25
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
of system can be further enhanced by using the URL-pathed index and lookup
scheme.
In this paper, we design and implement a structured P2P-based cooperative
caching system, namely DHTCache. DHTCache has all the features of SA-
Chord[5] and PBCache[6], and has a better lookup performance. In section 2,
we introduce SA-Chord and PBCache. Section 3 we describe DHTCache.
Section 4 provides simulation results. Conclusions are given in section 5.
3. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
26
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Path Service computes the URL of the query and sends it to SA-Chord. SA-
Chord will take over the query.
Once the object of the query is found, SA-Chord will return some
information of the Web object, such as location, etc, to the URL Path Service of
the node that sends the query. Then the information will be forwarded to the
Local Proxy. The Local Proxy sends directly the object information to the node
that can match the object information. Once the requested node receives such
object request, the requested node will query its local cache, and find out the
corresponding object. Then the requested node sends the object to the node that
request the object.
4. SIMULATION RESULTS
We conduct trace-driven simulation experiments to evaluate the
performance of DHTCache. We use the real world web logs obtained from two
different proxy server of NLANR[7]. Tab.1 presents some trace characteristics.
27
Downloaded From: http://ebooks.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/06/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-a
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
“Well, of all the crazy cunning!” The other girl simply gasped. “I
suppose there was some of the same concoction on the little bunch
of wild flowers that fell at your feet in the wood.... And I—I wouldn’t
believe you that anything happened—anything unusual that
morning! Sometimes—” Pemrose slowly shook her head
—“sometimes, Daddy says, I’m as wilful as an acid,” laughingly, “an
acid eating into salt—and it doesn’t do to be that way, eh?” The blue
eyes were mischievous, the lip corners penitent.
“But You! It was you who saved me. You won out against her—
with radio,” cried the victim of that unbalanced cunning. “It was you
—you who picked up my message—how I ever ticked it off, I don’t
know—remembered enough to tick it off! But you found out where I
was.” Una’s lip was trembling now—she dashed her hand across her
eyes, one bright drop, dislodged, fell upon the mountain grass. “It
was when Andrew saw your signal, your creamy sweater, waving
from the tree on Little Sister that he knew I was somewhere on that
mountain. Immediately he thought of that awful bank, that washout,
in the road—then he caught sight of us and climbed—oh! it was an
awful climb, too, right through the stream’s bed, for a short cut—was
just in time to head us off!”
“I know-ow.” Pemrose’s tone was very low. She caught an April
cowslip in the leather loop of her riding crop—there was silence for
five minutes. “But you—you yourself, were the real wonder,” she
said, then in the same low, thick voice. “Treff—Treff has never got
over talking of the way you came through—the clues you left behind
you—bits of your habit!”
“I carved them out with a knife I found—and she never saw me!”
Was it a new Una: the mischief, shrewdness—young strength—
leaking out of the eye-corners?
“And the bit—the little bit of your flower clock—oh-h! when I saw
that....” Pemrose’s hand pressed her lips.
“In case the rags might blow away that was! She—she was
watching me all the time; she’d have noticed if I tried to pin them
down—the flowers, she thought I was just playing with them!” More
mischief, more young strength, the lip corners curling up towards
the curly eyelashes—dark eyes twinkling.
“But how on earth did you find your feet, at all?” cried Pemrose
desperately. “It’s what I’ve always wanted to ask you. How did you
begin to come through—‘crash through’?”
“I think I found the Hidden Fire.” It was almost a whisper with
which Una bent to the Spring in the cowslip’s heart.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PEMROSE LORRY,
RADIO AMATEUR ***
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must,
at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy,
a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy
upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.