Topic
Given name
About: Given name is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 157 publications have been published within this topic receiving 1197 citations. The topic is also known as: first name & given names.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
13 Feb 2005
TL;DR: The authors presented an unsupervised approach that resolves name ambiguity by clustering the instances of a given name into groups, each of which is associated with a distinct underlying entity, using statistically significant bigrams that occur in the same context as the ambiguous name.
Abstract: It is relatively common for different people or organizations to share the same name. Given the increasing amount of information available online, this results in the ever growing possibility of finding misleading or incorrect information due to confusion caused by an ambiguous name. This paper presents an unsupervised approach that resolves name ambiguity by clustering the instances of a given name into groups, each of which is associated with a distinct underlying entity. The features we employ to represent the context of an ambiguous name are statistically significant bigrams that occur in the same context as the ambiguous name. From these features we create a co–occurrence matrix where the rows and columns represent the first and second words in bigrams, and the cells contain their log–likelihood scores. Then we represent each of the contexts in which an ambiguous name appears with a second order context vector. This is created by taking the average of the vectors from the co–occurrence matrix associated with the words that make up each context. This creates a high dimensional “instance by word” matrix that is reduced to its most significant dimensions by Singular Value Decomposition (SVD). The different “meanings” of a name are discriminated by clustering these second order context vectors with the method of Repeated Bisections. We evaluate this approach by conflating pairs of names found in a large corpus of text to create ambiguous pseudo-names. We find that our method is significantly more accurate than the majority classifier, and that the best results are obtained by having a small amount of local context to represent the instance, along with a larger amount of context for identifying features, or vice versa.
146 citations
Patent•
AT&T1
TL;DR: A self-provisioning names database as mentioned in this paper adds new names to a database for associating names to calling address data in a caller identification with name delivery service, which reaches only a nominal size in accordance with Perado's rule that approximately 80% of incoming calls to a subscriber will be from the same small group of callers.
Abstract: A self-provisioning names database adds new names to a database for associating names to calling address data in a caller identification with name delivery service. A new caller's name is added to the database each time the newcaller places a call to a service subscriber. The database reaches only a nominal size in accordance with Perado's rule that approximately 80% of incoming calls to a subscriber will be from the same small group of callers. Alternatively or in addition, a new party's name is added to the database each time a service subscriber places a call to a party whose name is not already in the names database. Caller names that have been stored in the database and not retrieved for a long period of time are discarded to store new names. Also, the database may periodically request updated data for a stored name, for example, to determine if a different telephone number or address has been assigned to the given name data.
101 citations
TL;DR: The International Code of Area Nomenclature (ICAN) is proposed, a naming system that can be used to classify newly coined or existing names based on a standard, which will improve communication among biogeographers, systematists, ecologists and conservation biologists.
Abstract: Biogeography needs a standard, coherent nomenclature. Currently, in biogeography, the same name is used for different areas of biological endemism, and one area of endemism is known by more than one name, which leads to conflict and confusion. The name ‘Mediterranean’, for example, may mean different things to different people – all or part of the sea, or the land in and around it. This results in ambiguity concerning the meaning of names and, more importantly, may lead to conflicts between inferences based on different aspects of a given name. We propose the International Code of Area Nomenclature (ICAN), a naming system that can be used to classify newly coined or existing names based on a standard. When fully implemented, the ICAN will improve communication among biogeographers, systematists, ecologists and conservation biologists.
83 citations
TL;DR: This paper attempts to lay out a systematic approach to the design of safe drug names by characterising the process of design as a multiple-objective optimisation problem, and describes several approaches to selecting one design from a set of competing alternatives.
Abstract: Recent observational studies of medication errors in community pharmacies suggest that ‘wrong drug’ errors, which occur when a patient receives a drug other than the one prescribed, may occur as many as 3.9 million times per year in the US. Similarity between drug product attributes, especially similarity between drug names, is thought to be a contributing cause of these errors. The challenge facing drug companies is to design new drug names that will not be confused with existing names. In this paper, we attempt to lay out a systematic approach to the design of safe drug names by characterising the process of design as a multiple-objective optimisation problem. We then identify and define the most important constraints (both technical and legal/regulatory) and objectives (such as meaning, memorability, and pronouncability) that a drug name must satisfy and critique methods for evaluating a given name with respect to each safety objective and constraint. There are a variety of preapproval tests that can be done on a name to test its vulnerability to confusion. These include computerised searches for existing similar names or products, soliciting expert judgements, doing traditional psycholinguistic tests on memory and perception and observing error rates during simulated ordering, dispensing and administration tasks. A different set of strategies is needed to prevent confusion between similar names that are already in use. Preventing confusion between already marketed products typically involves collecting voluntary reports of names involved in confusion errors, posting warnings and alerts both electronically and in areas where drugs are used, including the indication on the prescription, storing confusing drugs in different locations, improving lighting, providing magnifiers, removing one of the confusing drugs from the system or insisting on double-checking for products thought to be vulnerable to confusion. Finally, since no single design will be optimal with respect to all of the objectives, we describe several approaches to selecting one design from a set of competing alternatives. The pharmaceutical industry and the US FDA have taken important steps recently to improve the preapproval screening of new drug names, but a great deal of research still needs to be done to establish a valid scientific basis for these decisions.
57 citations
[...]
TL;DR: Kripke as discussed by the authors argues that "it is not possible to state a simple strong generalization about proper names. One can only say what is so for the most part and that must be qualified." I made that claim some fifteen years ago.
Abstract: 'It is not possible to state a simple strong generalization about proper names. One can only say what is so for the most part and that must be qualified.'" I made that claim some fifteen years ago. I still believe it. But the popularity of Saul Kripke's lectures on names suggests that reasons for believing such a claim are worth restating.2 Kripke offers no theory of proper names. One may suspect him of proposing one he says but he hopes not because he's sure that any theory is wrong.3 He presents not a theory but what he calls a 'picture'.4 His picture casts the following notions in starring roles: baptism ostension description and what he calls 'rigid designation'. Kripke fixes his and our attention on baptism at least fourteen times which is odd: taken literally or figuratively the notion is of some slight importance only in connection with some proper names.5 Literally a given or so-called 'Christian' name may be given to a human in the performance of a baptismal act.6 Even ecclesiastical law however recognizes that not every one is baptized. In the case of a name given by parents without recourse to baptism the name was held to acquire force only by repute. Taken figuratively Kripke would seem to be concerned with some 'initial act of naming'7 in which a name is given. Given names generally have been given to those whose names they are. But not invariably. 'Sean' is a given name: it was not given to Sean O'Casey. He was given the name 'John'. 'I'm goin' to call you Sean from this out, said the conductor, as he held Johnny's hand at parting' so said O'Casey who referred and continued for some time thereafter
43 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 6 |
| 2020 | 4 |
| 2019 | 5 |
| 2018 | 5 |
| 2017 | 8 |
| 2016 | 11 |