Am I alone in really disliking Towards Data Science?
While their articles always look nice, their content is all written quickly by data scientists wanting to polish their resume with the ultimate aim of rapidly generating content for TDS that will match every conceivable data science related search. This post clearly exists solely so that TDS can get the top spot for "Word2vec explained" (which they have). As evidence of this tactic you can see that there already is a TDS post "Word2vec made easy" [0], offering nothing substantially different than this one.
The problem is that content is almost never useful, it just looks nice at first skim through. The authors, at no real fault of their own, are just eager novices that rarely have new perspective to add to a topic. It's not uncommon to find huge conceptual errors (or at least gaps) in the content there.
I personally encourage everyone at every level to write about what they can, but the issue is that TDS has manipulated this population of eager data scientists in order to dominant search results on nearly every single topic they can cover related to DS, which has made searching for anything tedious.
Compare this post to the fantastic work of Jay Alammar [1]. Jay's post is truly excellent, covering a lot of interesting details about word2vec and providing excellent visuals as well.
I'm assuming TDS will fold as soon as DS stops being a "hot" topic (which I think we'll be in the relatively near future), and will personally be glad to see the web rid of their low signal blog spam.
If you think Word2Vec is cool, you can try to google X2Vec with whatever X comes up to your mind. you can almost make anything into a vector using the right neural network.
At my previous job I created a LinkedPage2Vec and used it to find Look Alike people for B2B marketing and sales. I also played a bit with Code2Vec.
I have been tempted to try word2vec-like techniques on e-commerce shopping carts as a way to find a particular type of recommendation. I suspect data will be too sparse, though.
Has anyone approached similar techniques on non-text corpuses?
It works…for some definition of “works”. It’s been applied to all kinds of problems—including graphs (Node2Vec) and many other cases where the input isn’t “words”—to the point that I’d consider it a weak baseline for any embedding task. In my experience it is unreasonably effective for simple problems (make a binary classifier for tweets), but the effectiveness drops quickly as the problem gets more complicated.
In your proposed use case I would bet that you will “see” the kind of similarity you’re looking for based on vector similarity, but I also expect it to largely be an illusion due to confirmation bias. It will be much harder to make that similarity actionable to solve the actual business use case. (Like 30% of the time it’ll work like magic; 60% of the time it’ll be “meh”; 10% of the time it’ll be hilariously wrong.)
Ive been looking at a way to use transformer based models on tabular data. The hope is that these models have a much better contextual understanding of words. So embeddings from these models should be of better quality than just word2vec ones
My idea is to use make a table row into a textual description and feed it into a transformer and get a get effectively a sentence embedding. This is effectively a query embedding. Then make a couple of value embeddings for the target you are trying to predict and use cosine similarity to predict the right value embedding and feed that to the ml model as part of the feature set. It works if the categorical values in your table are entities that the model might have learned.
I tried this approach and it did improve the overall performance. The next step would be fine tuning the transformer model. I want to see if I could do it without disturbing the existing weights too much. Here's the library I used to get get the embeddings
I have applied it to ecommerce shopping carts and it works quite well :). The itemids(words) viewed in sequence in a session can be thought of as a sentence.
I have applied it to the names in a population database. It learnt interesting, and expected structure. Visualized with UMAP it clustered by gender first, and then something that probably could be described as cultural origin of name.
For me the key point to understand what's going on(assumming I got it), is that the hidden layer "has" to produce similar representations for words that appear in the same contexts so the output layer can predict them.
The intuition behind doc2vec it's a bit harder to grasp. I understand the role of the "paragraph word": it provides context to the prediction so in "the ball hit the ---" in a basketball text the classifier would predict "rim" and in a football one "goalpost"(simplifying). But I still don't get why similar texts get similar latent representations.
The problem is, words are not the issue, concepts are. And for understanding meaning, both causal and conceptual understanding of a spacetime model of the world is needed. That’s why the word2vec approach to nlp is truly a dead end, although some associations can be gleaned.
Since it's 2022, use Sentence Transformers to embed short phrases. They are leaps above w2v. Or just use any model from Hugging Face. It's just 10 lines of code, really easy to start with.
Although Hacker News can reach Stack Overflow reductiveness of "just use X lol"...using Transformers for NLP is indeed the best answer for all in terms of performance, speed, and ease of implementation.
A weakness of TDS monopolizing data science SEO is that it's hard for better techniques to surface.
While their articles always look nice, their content is all written quickly by data scientists wanting to polish their resume with the ultimate aim of rapidly generating content for TDS that will match every conceivable data science related search. This post clearly exists solely so that TDS can get the top spot for "Word2vec explained" (which they have). As evidence of this tactic you can see that there already is a TDS post "Word2vec made easy" [0], offering nothing substantially different than this one.
The problem is that content is almost never useful, it just looks nice at first skim through. The authors, at no real fault of their own, are just eager novices that rarely have new perspective to add to a topic. It's not uncommon to find huge conceptual errors (or at least gaps) in the content there.
I personally encourage everyone at every level to write about what they can, but the issue is that TDS has manipulated this population of eager data scientists in order to dominant search results on nearly every single topic they can cover related to DS, which has made searching for anything tedious.
Compare this post to the fantastic work of Jay Alammar [1]. Jay's post is truly excellent, covering a lot of interesting details about word2vec and providing excellent visuals as well.
I'm assuming TDS will fold as soon as DS stops being a "hot" topic (which I think we'll be in the relatively near future), and will personally be glad to see the web rid of their low signal blog spam.
0. https://towardsdatascience.com/word2vec-made-easy-139a31a4b8... 1. https://jalammar.github.io/illustrated-word2vec/