Algorithmic Classification of Five Characteristic Types of Paraphasias.

PURPOSE

This study was intended to evaluate a series of algorithms developed to perform automatic classification of paraphasic errors (formal, semantic, mixed, neologistic, and unrelated errors).

METHOD

We analyzed 7,111 paraphasias from the Moss Aphasia Psycholinguistics Project Database (Mirman et al., 2010) and evaluated the classification accuracy of 3 automated tools. First, we used frequency norms from the SUBTLEXus database (Brysbaert & New, 2009) to differentiate nonword errors and real-word productions. Then we implemented a phonological-similarity algorithm to identify phonologically related real-word errors. Last, we assessed the performance of a semantic-similarity criterion that was based on word2vec (Mikolov, Yih, & Zweig, 2013).

RESULTS

Overall, the algorithmic classification replicated human scoring for the major categories of paraphasias studied with high accuracy. The tool that was based on the SUBTLEXus frequency norms was more than 97% accurate in making lexicality judgments. The phonological-similarity criterion was approximately 91% accurate, and the overall classification accuracy of the semantic classifier ranged from 86% to 90%.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the results highlight the potential of tools from the field of natural language processing for the development of highly reliable, cost-effective diagnostic tools suitable for collecting high-quality measurement data for research and clinical purposes.