[Allott, N., and Textor, M. 2012. Lexical Pragmatic Adjustment and the Nature of Ad Hoc Concepts. International Review of Pragmatics 4(2).10.1163/18773109-00040204]Search in Google Scholar
[Arora, S.; Li, Y.; Liang, Y.; Ma, T.; and Risteski, A. 2015. Random Walks on Context Spaces: Towards an Explanation of the Mysteries of Semantic Word Embeddings. CoRR abs/1502.03520.]Search in Google Scholar
[Baroni, M., and Lenci, A. 2010. Distributional Memory: A General Framework for Corpus Based Semantics. Computational Linguistics 36(4):673–721.10.1162/coli_a_00016]Search in Google Scholar
[Baroni, M.; Dinu, G.; and Kruszewski, G. 2014. Don’t count, predict! A systematic comparison of context-counting vs. context-predicting semantic vectors. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), 238–247. Baltimore, Maryland: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/v1/P14-1023]Search in Google Scholar
[Barsalou, L. W. 1993. Flexibility, Structure, and Linguistic Vagary in Concepts: Manifestations of Compositional System of Perceptual Symbols. In Collins, A. F.; Gathercole, S. E.; Conway, M. A.; and Morris, P. E., eds., Theories of Memory. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 29–101.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bengio, Y.; Ducharme, R.; Vincent, P.; and Jauvin, C. 2003. A Neural Probabilistic Language Model. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:1137–1155.]Search in Google Scholar
[Blei, D. M.; Ng, A. Y.; and Jordan, M. I. 2003. Latent Dirichlet Allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:993–1022.]Search in Google Scholar
[Boden, M. A. 1990. The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brown, P. F.; deSouza, P. V.; Mercer, R. L.; Della Pietra, V. J.; and Lai, J. C. 1992. Class-Based n-gram Models of Natural Language. Computational Linguistics 18(4):467–479.]Search in Google Scholar
[Carston, R. 2010. Lexical Pragmatics, Ad Hoc Concepts and Metaphor. Italian Journal of Linguistics 22(1):153–180.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cimiano, P.; Staab, S.; and Tane, J. 2003. Automatic acquisition of taxonomies from text: FCA meets NLP. In In Proceedings of ECML/PKDD Workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining.]Search in Google Scholar
[Clark, A. 2006. Language, Embodiment, and the Cognitive Niche. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10(8).10.1016/j.tics.2006.06.012]Search in Google Scholar
[Clark, S. 2015. Vector Space Models of Lexical Meaning. In Lappin, S., and Fox, C., eds., The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118882139.ch16]Search in Google Scholar
[Collobert, R., and Weston, J. 2008. A Unified Architecture for Natural Language Processing: Deep Neural Networks with Multitask Learning. In Proceedings of the 25 th International Conference on Machine Learning.10.1145/1390156.1390177]Search in Google Scholar
[Davidson, D. 1974. On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme. In Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, volume 47, 5–20.]Search in Google Scholar
[Deerwester, S.; Dumais, S. T.; Furnas, G. W.; Landauer, T. K.; and Harshman, R. 1990. Indexing by Latent Semantic Analysis. Jounal of the American Society for Information Science 41(6):391–407.10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199009)41:6<391::AID-ASI1>3.0.CO;2-9]Search in Google Scholar
[Fauconnier, G., and Turner, M. 1998. Conceptual Integration Networks. Cognitive Science 22(4):133–187.10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1]Search in Google Scholar
[Fellbaum, C., ed. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7287.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Gärdenfors, P. 2000. Conceptual Space: The Geometry of Thought. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/2076.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, J. J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Miffline.]Search in Google Scholar
[Grefenstette, E., and Sadrzadeh, M. 2011. Experimental Support for a Categorical Compositional Distributional Model of Meaning. Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.]Search in Google Scholar
[Harris, Z. 1957. Co-Occurrence and Transformation in Linguistic Structure. Language 33(3):283–340.10.2307/411155]Search in Google Scholar
[Hassan, S., and Mihalcea, R. 2011. Semantic Relatedness Using Salient Semantic Analysis. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.10.1609/aaai.v25i1.7971]Search in Google Scholar
[Hill, F.; Korhonen, A.; and Bentz, C. 2014. A Quantitative Empirical Analysis of the Abstract/Concrete Distinction. Cognitive Science 38:162–177.10.1111/cogs.1207623941240]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, E. H.; Socher, R.; Manning, C. D.; and Ng, A. Y. 2012. Improving Word Representations via Global Context and Multiple Word Prototypes. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, volume Long Papers: Volume 1, 873–882.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kanejiya, D.; Kumar, A.; and Prasad, S. 2003. Automatic Evaluation of Students Answers using Syntactically Enhanced LSA. In Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL 03 workshop on Building educational applications using natural language processing, 53–60.]Search in Google Scholar
[Koestler, A. 1964. The Act of Creation. London, UK: Hutchinson.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lapesa, G., and Evert, S. 2013. Evaluating Neighbor Rank and Distance Measures as Predictors of Semantic Priming. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levy, O.; Goldberg, Y.; and Dagan, I. 2015. Improving Distributional Similarity with Lessons Learned from Word Embeddings. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 3.10.1162/tacl_a_00134]Search in Google Scholar
[Lund, K., and Burgess, K. 1996. Producing High-Dimensional Semantic Spaces from Lexical Co-Occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 28(2):203–208.10.3758/BF03204766]Search in Google Scholar
[Manning, C., and Schütze, H. 1999. Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mikolov, T.; Chen, K.; Corrado, G.; and Dean, J. 2013. Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space. In Proceedings of ICLR Workshop.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mikolov, T.; Yih, W.-T.; and Zweig, G. 2013. Linguistic Regularities in Continuous Space Word Representations. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 246–251.]Search in Google Scholar
[Milajevs, D.; Kartsaklis, D.; Sadrzadeh, M.; and Purver, M. 2014. Evaluating Neural Word Representations in Tensor-Based Compositional Settings. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 708–719. Doha, Qatar: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/v1/D14-1079]Search in Google Scholar
[Moffat, D., and Kelly, M. 2006. An investigation into people’s bias against computational creativity in music composition. In Proceedings of the International Joint Workshop on Computational Creativity.]Search in Google Scholar
[Padó, S., and Lapata, M. 2007. Dependency-Based Construction of Semantic Space Models. Computational Linguistics 33(2):161–199.10.1162/coli.2007.33.2.161]Search in Google Scholar
[Pearce, M. T.; Müllensiefen, D.; and Wiggins, G. A. 2010. The role of expectation and probabilistic learning in auditory boundary perception: A model comparison. Perception 39(10):1367–1391.10.1068/p650721180358]Search in Google Scholar
[Pennington, J.; Socher, R.; and Manning, C. D. 2014. GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.10.3115/v1/D14-1162]Search in Google Scholar
[Ritchie, G. 2007. Some empirical criteria for attributing creativity to a computer program. Minds and Machines 17(1):67–99.10.1007/s11023-007-9066-2]Search in Google Scholar
[Rychlý, P., and Kilgarriff, A. 2007. An efficient algorithm for building a distributional thesaurus (and other Sketch Engine developments). In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Companion Volume Proceedings of the Demo and Poster Sessions, 41–44. Prague, Czech Republic: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/1557769.1557783]Search in Google Scholar
[Schütze, H. 1992. Dimensions of Meaning. In Proc. ACM/IEEE Conference, 787–796.]Search in Google Scholar
[Snow, R.; Jurafsky, D.; and Ng, A. Y. 2006. Semantic Taxonomy Induction from Heterogenous Evidence. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 801–808. Sydney, Australia: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/1220175.1220276]Search in Google Scholar
[Socher, R.; Huval, B.; Manning, C. D.; and Ng, A. Y. 2012. Semantic Compositionality Through Recursive Matrix-vector Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, EMNLP-CoNLL ’12, 1201–1211. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.]Search in Google Scholar
[Turney, P. D., and Pantel, P. 2010. From Frequency to Meaning: Vector Space Models of Semantics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (37):141–188.10.1613/jair.2934]Search in Google Scholar
[Widdows, D. 2004. Geometry and Meaning. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wiggins, G. A. 2006. A Preliminary Framework for Description, Analysis and Comparison of Creative Systems. Journal of Knowledge Based Systems 19(7):449–458.10.1016/j.knosys.2006.04.009]Search in Google Scholar
[Yogatama, D.; Faruqui, M.; Dyer, C.; and Smith, N. A. 2015. Learning Word Representations with Hierarchical Sparse Coding. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning.]Search in Google Scholar