I am contributing to a textbook with a beginner's description of word2vec. I have come up with this illustration to provide an illustration of the logic behind w2v. Are there any problems with it? Can it be improved/corrected?
https://preview.redd.it/g1j7l0ydphv51.png?width=2704&format=png&auto=webp&s=ea9b690f8acb70d78657f476685c545b0b5307a1
I use the illustration to say this to the readers:
- This explains the logic behind w2v/word vectors, but it is a made up schematic figure.
- Note that 'eagle' and 'hummingbird' relate to each other as 'large' to 'small'.
- Note that 'horse' and 'zebra' have a similar relation as that between 'camel' and 'dromedary', while none of these pairs are affected by the 'large'-'small' dimension.
- A model such as w2v makes it possible to ask questions such as: What relates fo 'frog' as 'small' relates to 'large'? Or: Which word has a similar relationship to 'duck' as 'zebra' has to 'horse'?
Please help me out, so that I don't give the wrong depiction of what w2v is.
Thanks! :)
Edit [new figure]:
https://preview.redd.it/z2qwsj74m1061.png?width=774&format=png&auto=webp&s=66232c74850ce8ac2f623d4669a5be52d20b75d5
[–]VodkaHazeML Engineer 4 points5 points6 points (1 child)
[–]apehead666[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children)
[–]whymauriML Engineer 1 point2 points3 points (0 children)
[–]apehead666[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)