Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-13428-4

Natural language processing: state of the art,

current trends and challenges

Diksha Khurana 1 & Aditya Koli 1 & Kiran Khatter 2 & Sukhdev Singh
3

Received: 3 February 2021 / Revised: 23 March 2022 / Accepted: 2 July 2022 /

Published online: 14 July 2022
# The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022,
corrected publication 2022

Abstract
Natural language processing (NLP) has recently gained much attention for representing
and analyzing human language computationally. It has spread its applications in various
fields such as machine translation, email spam detection, information extraction, summa-
rization, medical, and question answering etc. In this paper, we first distinguish four
phases by discussing different levels of NLP and components of Natural Language
Generation followed by presenting the history and evolution of NLP. We then discuss
in detail the state of the art presenting the various applications of NLP, current trends, and
challenges. Finally, we present a discussion on some available datasets, models, and
evaluation metrics in NLP.

Keywords Natural language processing . Natural language understanding . Natural language

generation . NLP applications . NLP evaluation metrics

* Kiran Khatter
[email protected]

Diksha Khurana
[email protected]

Aditya Koli
[email protected]
Sukhdev Singh
[email protected]

1
Department of Computer Science, Manav Rachna International Institute of Research and Studies,
Faridabad, India
2
Department of Computer Science, BML Munjal University, Gurgaon, India
3
Department of Statistics, Amity University Punjab, Mohali, India

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3714 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

1 Introduction

A language can be defined as a set of rules or set of symbols where symbols are combined and
used for conveying information or broadcasting the information. Since all the users may not be
well-versed in machine specific language, Natural Language Processing (NLP) caters those
users who do not have enough time to learn new languages or get perfection in it. In fact, NLP
is a tract of Artificial Intelligence and Linguistics, devoted to make computers understand the
statements or words written in human languages. It came into existence to ease the user’s work
and to satisfy the wish to communicate with the computer in natural language, and can be
classified into two parts i.e. Natural Language Understanding or Linguistics and Natural
Language Generation which evolves the task to understand and generate the text. Linguistics
is the science of language which includes Phonology that refers to sound, Morphology word
formation, Syntax sentence structure, Semantics syntax and Pragmatics which refers to
understanding. Noah Chomsky, one of the first linguists of twelfth century that started
syntactic theories, marked a unique position in the field of theoretical linguistics because he
revolutionized the area of syntax (Chomsky, 1965) [23]. Further, Natural Language Genera-
tion (NLG) is the process of producing phrases, sentences and paragraphs that are meaningful
from an internal representation. The first objective of this paper is to give insights of the
various important terminologies of NLP and NLG.
In the existing literature, most of the work in NLP is conducted by computer scientists
while various other professionals have also shown interest such as linguistics, psychologists,
and philosophers etc. One of the most interesting aspects of NLP is that it adds up to the
knowledge of human language. The field of NLP is related with different theories and
techniques that deal with the problem of natural language of communicating with the
computers. Few of the researched tasks of NLP are Automatic Summarization (Automatic
summarization produces an understandable summary of a set of text and provides summaries
or detailed information of text of a known type), Co-Reference Resolution (Co-reference
resolution refers to a sentence or larger set of text that determines all words which refer to the
same object), Discourse Analysis (Discourse analysis refers to the task of identifying the
discourse structure of connected text i.e. the study of text in relation to social context),Machine
Translation (Machine translation refers to automatic translation of text from one language to
another),Morphological Segmentation (Morphological segmentation refers to breaking words
into individual meaning-bearing morphemes), Named Entity Recognition (Named entity
recognition (NER) is used for information extraction to recognized name entities and then
classify them to different classes), Optical Character Recognition (Optical character recogni-
tion (OCR) is used for automatic text recognition by translating printed and handwritten text
into machine-readable format), Part Of Speech Tagging (Part of speech tagging describes a
sentence, determines the part of speech for each word) etc. Some of these tasks have direct
real-world applications such as Machine translation, Named entity recognition, Optical char-
acter recognition etc. Though NLP tasks are obviously very closely interwoven but they are
used frequently, for convenience. Some of the tasks such as automatic summarization, co-
reference analysis etc. act as subtasks that are used in solving larger tasks. Nowadays NLP is in
the talks because of various applications and recent developments although in the late 1940s
the term wasn’t even in existence. So, it will be interesting to know about the history of NLP,
the progress so far has been made and some of the ongoing projects by making use of NLP.
The second objective of this paper focus on these aspects. The third objective of this paper is
on datasets, approaches, evaluation metrics and involved challenges in NLP. The rest of this

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3715

paper is organized as follows. Section 2 deals with the first objective mentioning the various
important terminologies of NLP and NLG. Section 3 deals with the history of NLP, applica-
tions of NLP and a walkthrough of the recent developments. Datasets used in NLP and various
approaches are presented in Section 4, and Section 5 is written on evaluation metrics and
challenges involved in NLP. Finally, a conclusion is presented in Section 6.

2 Components of NLP

NLP can be classified into two parts i.e., Natural Language Understanding and Natural
Language Generation which evolves the task to understand and generate the text. Figure 1
presents the broad classification of NLP. The objective of this section is to discuss the Natural
Language Understanding (Linguistic) (NLU) and the Natural Language Generation (NLG).

2.1 NLU

NLU enables machines to understand natural language and analyze it by extracting concepts,
entities, emotion, keywords etc. It is used in customer care applications to understand the
problems reported by customers either verbally or in writing. Linguistics is the science which
involves the meaning of language, language context and various forms of the language. So, it
is important to understand various important terminologies of NLP and different levels of
NLP. We next discuss some of the commonly used terminologies in different levels of NLP.

a) Phonology

Phonology is the part of Linguistics which refers to the systematic arrangement of sound. The
term phonology comes from Ancient Greek in which the term phono means voice or sound
and the suffix –logy refers to word or speech. In 1993 Nikolai Trubetzkoy stated that

Fig. 1 Broad classification of NLP

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3716 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

Phonology is “the study of sound pertaining to the system of language” whereas Lass1998
[66]wrote that phonology refers broadly with the sounds of language, concerned with sub-
discipline of linguistics, behavior and organization of sounds. Phonology includes semantic
use of sound to encode meaning of any Human language.

b) Morphology

The different parts of the word represent the smallest units of meaning known as Morphemes.
Morphology which comprises Nature of words, are initiated by morphemes. An example of
Morpheme could be, the word precancellation can be morphologically scrutinized into three
separate morphemes: the prefix pre, the root cancella, and the suffix -tion. The interpretation
of morphemes stays the same across all the words, just to understand the meaning humans can
break any unknown word into morphemes. For example, adding the suffix –ed to a verb,
conveys that the action of the verb took place in the past. The words that cannot be divided and
have meaning by themselves are called Lexical morpheme (e.g.: table, chair). The words (e.g. -
ed, −ing, −est, −ly, −ful) that are combined with the lexical morpheme are known as
Grammatical morphemes (eg. Worked, Consulting, Smallest, Likely, Use). The Grammatical
morphemes that occur in combination called bound morphemes (eg. -ed, −ing) Bound
morphemes can be divided into inflectional morphemes and derivational morphemes. Adding
Inflectional morphemes to a word changes the different grammatical categories such as tense,
gender, person, mood, aspect, definiteness and animacy. For example, addition of inflectional
morphemes –ed changes the root park to parked. Derivational morphemes change the
semantic meaning of the word when it is combined with that word. For example, in the word
normalize, the addition of the bound morpheme –ize to the root normal changes the word from
an adjective (normal) to a verb (normalize).

c) Lexical

In Lexical, humans, as well as NLP systems, interpret the meaning of individual words.
Sundry types of processing bestow to word-level understanding – the first of these being a
part-of-speech tag to each word. In this processing, words that can act as more than one part-
of-speech are assigned the most probable part-of-speech tag based on the context in which they
occur. At the lexical level, Semantic representations can be replaced by the words that have
one meaning. In fact, in the NLP system the nature of the representation varies according to the
semantic theory deployed. Therefore, at lexical level, analysis of structure of words is
performed with respect to their lexical meaning and PoS. In this analysis, text is divided into
paragraphs, sentences, and words. Words that can be associated with more than one PoS are
aligned with the most likely PoS tag based on the context in which they occur. At lexical level,
semantic representation can also be replaced by assigning the correct POS tag which improves
the understanding of the intended meaning of a sentence. It is used for cleaning and feature
extraction using various techniques such as removal of stop words, stemming, lemmatization
etc. Stop words such as ‘in’, ‘the’, ‘and’ etc. are removed as they don’t contribute to any
meaningful interpretation and their frequency is also high which may affect the computation
time. Stemming is used to stem the words of the text by removing the suffix of a word to
obtain its root form. For example: consulting and consultant words are converted to the word
consult after stemming, using word gets converted to us and driver is reduced to driv.
Lemmatization does not remove the suffix of a word; in fact, it results in the source word

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3717

with the use of a vocabulary. For example, in case of token drived, stemming results in “driv”,
whereas lemmatization attempts to return the correct basic form either drive or drived
depending on the context it is used.

d) Syntactic

After PoS tagging done at lexical level, words are grouped to phrases and phrases are grouped
to form clauses and then phrases are combined to sentences at syntactic level. It emphasizes the
correct formation of a sentence by analyzing the grammatical structure of the sentence. The
output of this level is a sentence that reveals structural dependency between words. It is also
known as parsing which uncovers the phrases that convey more meaning in comparison to the
meaning of individual words. Syntactic level examines word order, stop-words, morphology
and PoS of words which lexical level does not consider. Changing word order will change the
dependency among words and may also affect the comprehension of sentences. For example,
in the sentences “ram beats shyam in a competition” and “shyam beats ram in a competition”,
only syntax is different but convey different meanings [139]. It retains the stopwords as
removal of them changes the meaning of the sentence. It doesn’t support lemmatization and
stemming because converting words to its basic form changes the grammar of the sentence. It
focuses on identification on correct PoS of sentences. For example: in the sentence “frowns on
his face”, “frowns” is a noun whereas it is a verb in the sentence “he frowns”.

e) Semantic

On a semantic level, the most important task is to determine the proper meaning of a sentence.
To understand the meaning of a sentence, human beings rely on the knowledge about language
and the concepts present in that sentence, but machines can’t count on these techniques.
Semantic processing determines the possible meanings of a sentence by processing its logical
structure to recognize the most relevant words to understand the interactions among words or
different concepts in the sentence. For example, it understands that a sentence is about
“movies” even if it doesn’t comprise actual words, but it contains related concepts such as
“actor”, “actress”, “dialogue” or “script”. This level of processing also incorporates the
semantic disambiguation of words with multiple senses (Elizabeth D. Liddy, 2001) [68]. For
example, the word “bark” as a noun can mean either as a sound that a dog makes or outer
covering of the tree. The semantic level examines words for their dictionary interpretation or
interpretation is derived from the context of the sentence. For example: the sentence “Krishna
is good and noble.” This sentence is either talking about Lord Krishna or about a person
“Krishna”. That is why, to get the proper meaning of the sentence, the appropriate interpre-
tation is considered by looking at the rest of the sentence [44].

f) Discourse

While syntax and semantics level deal with sentence-length units, the discourse level of NLP
deals with more than one sentence. It deals with the analysis of logical structure by making
connections among words and sentences that ensure its coherence. It focuses on the properties
of the text that convey meaning by interpreting the relations between sentences and uncovering
linguistic structures from texts at several levels (Liddy,2001) [68]. The two of the most
common levels are: Anaphora Resolution and Coreference Resolution. Anaphora resolution

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3718 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

is achieved by recognizing the entity referenced by an anaphor to resolve the references used
within the text with the same sense. For example, (i) Ram topped in the class. (ii) He was
intelligent. Here i) and ii) together form a discourse. Human beings can quickly understand
that the pronoun “he” in (ii) refers to “Ram” in (i). The interpretation of “He” depends on
another word “Ram” presented earlier in the text. Without determining the relationship
between these two structures, it would not be possible to decide why Ram topped the class
and who was intelligent. Coreference resolution is achieved by finding all expressions that
refer to the same entity in a text. It is an important step in various NLP applications that
involve high-level NLP tasks such as document summarization, information extraction etc. In
fact, anaphora is encoded through one of the processes called co-reference.

g) Pragmatic

Pragmatic level focuses on the knowledge or content that comes from the outside the content
of the document. It deals with what speaker implies and what listener infers. In fact, it analyzes
the sentences that are not directly spoken. Real-world knowledge is used to understand what is
being talked about in the text. By analyzing the context, meaningful representation of the text
is derived. When a sentence is not specific and the context does not provide any specific
information about that sentence, Pragmatic ambiguity arises (Walton, 1996) [143]. Pragmatic
ambiguity occurs when different persons derive different interpretations of the text, depending
on the context of the text. The context of a text may include the references of other sentences of
the same document, which influence the understanding of the text and the background
knowledge of the reader or speaker, which gives a meaning to the concepts expressed in that
text. Semantic analysis focuses on literal meaning of the words, but pragmatic analysis focuses
on the inferred meaning that the readers perceive based on their background knowledge. For
example, the sentence “Do you know what time is it?” is interpreted to “Asking for the current
time” in semantic analysis whereas in pragmatic analysis, the same sentence may refer to
“expressing resentment to someone who missed the due time” in pragmatic analysis. Thus,
semantic analysis is the study of the relationship between various linguistic utterances and their
meanings, but pragmatic analysis is the study of context which influences our understanding of
linguistic expressions. Pragmatic analysis helps users to uncover the intended meaning of the
text by applying contextual background knowledge.
The goal of NLP is to accommodate one or more specialties of an algorithm or system. The
metric of NLP assess on an algorithmic system allows for the integration of language
understanding and language generation. It is even used in multilingual event detection.
Rospocher et al. [112] purposed a novel modular system for cross-lingual event extraction
for English, Dutch, and Italian Texts by using different pipelines for different languages. The
system incorporates a modular set of foremost multilingual NLP tools. The pipeline integrates
modules for basic NLP processing as well as more advanced tasks such as cross-lingual named
entity linking, semantic role labeling and time normalization. Thus, the cross-lingual frame-
work allows for the interpretation of events, participants, locations, and time, as well as the
relations between them. Output of these individual pipelines is intended to be used as input for
a system that obtains event centric knowledge graphs. All modules take standard input, to do
some annotation, and produce standard output which in turn becomes the input for the next
module pipelines. Their pipelines are built as a data centric architecture so that modules can be
adapted and replaced. Furthermore, modular architecture allows for different configurations
and for dynamic distribution.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3719

Ambiguity is one of the major problems of natural language which occurs when one
sentence can lead to different interpretations. This is usually faced in syntactic, semantic,
and lexical levels. In case of syntactic level ambiguity, one sentence can be parsed into
multiple syntactical forms. Semantic ambiguity occurs when the meaning of words can be
misinterpreted. Lexical level ambiguity refers to ambiguity of a single word that can have
multiple assertions. Each of these levels can produce ambiguities that can be solved by the
knowledge of the complete sentence. The ambiguity can be solved by various methods such as
Minimizing Ambiguity, Preserving Ambiguity, Interactive Disambiguation and Weighting
Ambiguity [125]. Some of the methods proposed by researchers to remove ambiguity is
preserving ambiguity, e.g. (Shemtov 1997; Emele & Dorna 1998; Knight & Langkilde
2000; Tong Gao et al. 2015, Umber & Bajwa 2011) [39, 46, 65, 125, 139]. Their objectives
are closely in line with removal or minimizing ambiguity. They cover a wide range of
ambiguities and there is a statistical element implicit in their approach.

2.2 NLG

Natural Language Generation (NLG) is the process of producing phrases, sentences and
paragraphs that are meaningful from an internal representation. It is a part of Natural Language
Processing and happens in four phases: identifying the goals, planning on how goals may be
achieved by evaluating the situation and available communicative sources and realizing the
plans as a text (Fig. 2). It is opposite to Understanding.

a) Speaker and Generator

To generate a text, we need to have a speaker or an application and a generator or a program

that renders the application’s intentions into a fluent phrase relevant to the situation.

Fig. 2 Components of NLG

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3720 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

b) Components and Levels of Representation

The process of language generation involves the following interweaved tasks. Content selec-
tion: Information should be selected and included in the set. Depending on how this informa-
tion is parsed into representational units, parts of the units may have to be removed while some
others may be added by default. Textual Organization: The information must be textually
organized according to the grammar, it must be ordered both sequentially and in terms of
linguistic relations like modifications. Linguistic Resources: To support the information’s
realization, linguistic resources must be chosen. In the end these resources will come down
to choices of particular words, idioms, syntactic constructs etc. Realization: The selected and
organized resources must be realized as an actual text or voice output.

c) Application or Speaker

This is only for maintaining the model of the situation. Here the speaker just initiates the
process doesn’t take part in the language generation. It stores the history, structures the content
that is potentially relevant and deploys a representation of what it knows. All these forms the
situation, while selecting subset of propositions that speaker has. The only requirement is the
speaker must make sense of the situation [91].

3 NLP: Then and now

In the late 1940s the term NLP wasn’t in existence, but the work regarding machine translation
(MT) had started. In fact, Research in this period was not completely localized. Russian and
English were the dominant languages for MT (Andreev,1967) [4]. In fact, MT/NLP research
almost died in 1966 according to the ALPAC report, which concluded that MT is going
nowhere. But later, some MT production systems were providing output to their customers
(Hutchins, 1986) [60]. By this time, work on the use of computers for literary and linguistic
studies had also started. As early as 1960, signature work influenced by AI began, with the
BASEBALL Q-A systems (Green et al., 1961) [51]. LUNAR (Woods,1978) [152] and
Winograd SHRDLU were natural successors of these systems, but they were seen as
stepped-up sophistication, in terms of their linguistic and their task processing capabilities.
There was a widespread belief that progress could only be made on the two sides, one is
ARPA Speech Understanding Research (SUR) project (Lea, 1980) and other in some major
system developments projects building database front ends. The front-end projects (Hendrix
et al., 1978) [55] were intended to go beyond LUNAR in interfacing the large databases. In
early 1980s computational grammar theory became a very active area of research linked with
logics for meaning and knowledge’s ability to deal with the user’s beliefs and intentions and
with functions like emphasis and themes.
By the end of the decade the powerful general purpose sentence processors like SRI’s Core
Language Engine (Alshawi,1992) [2] and Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp and
Reyle,1993) [62] offered a means of tackling more extended discourse within the
grammatico-logical framework. This period was one of the growing communities. Practical
resources, grammars, and tools and parsers became available (for example: Alvey Natural
Language Tools) (Briscoe et al., 1987) [18]. The (D)ARPA speech recognition and message
understanding (information extraction) conferences were not only for the tasks they addressed

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3721

but for the emphasis on heavy evaluation, starting a trend that became a major feature in 1990s
(Young and Chase, 1998; Sundheim and Chinchor,1993) [131, 157]. Work on user modeling
(Wahlster and Kobsa, 1989) [142] was one strand in a research paper. Cohen et al. (2002) [28]
had put forwarded a first approximation of a compositional theory of tune interpretation,
together with phonological assumptions on which it is based and the evidence from which they
have drawn their proposals. At the same time, McKeown (1985) [85] demonstrated that
rhetorical schemas could be used for producing both linguistically coherent and communica-
tively effective text. Some research in NLP marked important topics for future like word sense
disambiguation (Small et al., 1988) [126] and probabilistic networks, statistically colored NLP,
the work on the lexicon, also pointed in this direction. Statistical language processing was a
major thing in 90s (Manning and Schuetze,1999) [75], because this not only involves data
analysts. Information extraction and automatic summarizing (Mani and Maybury,1999) [74]
was also a point of focus. Next, we present a walkthrough of the developments from the early
2000.

3.1 A walkthrough of recent developments in NLP

The main objectives of NLP include interpretation, analysis, and manipulation of natural
language data for the intended purpose with the use of various algorithms, tools, and methods.
However, there are many challenges involved which may depend upon the natural language
data under consideration, and so makes it difficult to achieve all the objectives with a single
approach. Therefore, the development of different tools and methods in the field of NLP and
relevant areas of studies have received much attention from several researchers in the recent
past. The developments can be seen in the Fig. 3:
In early 2000, neural language modeling in which the probability of occurring of next word
(token) is determined given n previous words. Bendigo et al. [12] proposed the concept of feed
forward neural network and lookup table which represents the n previous words in sequence.
Collobert et al. [29] proposed the application of multitask learning in the field of NLP, where
two convolutional models with max pooling were used to perform parts-of-speech and named
entity recognition tagging. Mikolov et.al. [87] proposed a word embedding process where the
dense vector representation of text was addressed. They also report the challenges faced by
traditional sparse bag-of-words representation. After the advancement of word embedding,
neural networks were introduced in the field of NLP where variable length input is taken for
further processing. Sutskever et al. [132] proposed a general framework for sequence-to-
sequence mapping where encoder and decoder networks are used to map from sequence to
vector and vector to sequence respectively. In fact, the use of neural networks have played a
very important role in NLP. One can observe from the existing literature that enough use of
neural networks was not there in the early 2000s but till the year 2013enough discussion had
happened about the use of neural networks in the field of NLP which transformed many things
and further paved the way to implement various neural networks in NLP. Earlier the use of
Convolutional neural networks (CNN) contributed to the field of image classification and
analyzing visual imagery for further analysis. Later the use of CNNs can be observed in
tackling problems associated with NLP tasks like Sentence Classification [127], Sentiment
Analysis [135], Text Classification [118], Text Summarization [158], Machine Translation
[70] and Answer Relations [150]. An article by Newatia (2019) [93] illustrates the general
architecture behind any CNN model, and how it can be used in the context of NLP. One can
also refer to the work of Wang and Gang [145] for the applications of CNN in NLP. Further

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3722 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

Fig. 3 A walkthrough of recent developments in NLP

Neural Networks those are recurrent in nature due to performing the same function for every
data, also known as Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), have also been used in NLP, and
found ideal for sequential data such as text, time series, financial data, speech, audio, video
among others, see article by Thomas (2019) [137]. One of the modified versions of RNNs is
Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) which is also very useful in the cases where only the
desired important information needs to be retained for a much longer time discarding the
irrelevant information, see [52, 58]. Further development in the LSTM has also led to a slightly
simpler variant, called the gated recurrent unit (GRU), which has shown better results than
standard LSTMs in many tasks [22, 26]. Attention mechanisms [7] which suggest a network to
learn what to pay attention to in accordance with the current hidden state and annotation
together with the use of transformers have also made a significant development in NLP, see
[141]. It is to be noticed that Transformers have a potential of learning longer-term dependency
but are limited by a fixed-length context in the setting of language modeling. In this direction
recently Dai et al. [30] proposed a novel neural architecture Transformer-XL (XL as extra-
long) which enables learning dependencies beyond a fixed length of words. Further the work
of Rae et al. [104] on the Compressive Transformer, an attentive sequence model which
compresses memories for long-range sequence learning, may be helpful for the readers. One
may also refer to the recent work by Otter et al. [98] on uses of Deep Learning for NLP, and

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3723

relevant references cited therein. The use of BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations
from Transformers) [33] model and successive models have also played an important role for
NLP.
Many researchers worked on NLP, building tools and systems which makes NLP what it is
today. Tools like Sentiment Analyser, Parts of Speech (POS) Taggers, Chunking, Named
Entity Recognitions (NER), Emotion detection, Semantic Role Labeling have a huge contri-
bution made to NLP, and are good topics for research. Sentiment analysis
(Nasukawaetal.,2003) [156] works by extracting sentiments about a given topic, and it consists
of a topic specific feature term extraction, sentiment extraction, and association by relationship
analysis. It utilizes two linguistic resources for the analysis: the sentiment lexicon and the
sentiment pattern database. It analyzes the documents for positive and negative words and tries
to give ratings on scale −5 to +5. The mainstream of currently used tagsets is obtained from
English. The most widely used tagsets as standard guidelines are designed for Indo-European
languages but it is less researched on Asian languages or middle- eastern languages. Various
authors have done research on making parts of speech taggers for various languages such as
Arabic (Zeroual et al., 2017) [160], Sanskrit (Tapswi & Jain, 2012) [136], Hindi (Ranjan &
Basu, 2003) [105] to efficiently tag and classify words as nouns, adjectives, verbs etc. Authors
in [136] have used treebank technique for creating rule-based POS Tagger for Sanskrit
Language. Sanskrit sentences are parsed to assign the appropriate tag to each word using
suffix stripping algorithm, wherein the longest suffix is searched from the suffix table and tags
are assigned. Diab et al. (2004) [34] used supervised machine learning approach and adopted
Support Vector Machines (SVMs) which were trained on the Arabic Treebank to automati-
cally tokenize parts of speech tag and annotate base phrases in Arabic text.
Chunking is a process of separating phrases from unstructured text. Since simple tokens
may not represent the actual meaning of the text, it is advisable to use phrases such as “North
Africa” as a single word instead of ‘North’ and ‘Africa’ separate words. Chunking known as
“Shadow Parsing” labels parts of sentences with syntactic correlated keywords like Noun
Phrase (NP) and Verb Phrase (VP). Chunking is often evaluated using the CoNLL 2000 shared
task. Various researchers (Sha and Pereira, 2003; McDonald et al., 2005; Sun et al., 2008) [83,
122, 130] used CoNLL test data for chunking and used features composed of words, POS tags,
and tags.
There are particular words in the document that refer to specific entities or real-world
objects like location, people, organizations etc. To find the words which have a unique context
and are more informative, noun phrases are considered in the text documents. Named entity
recognition (NER) is a technique to recognize and separate the named entities and group them
under predefined classes. But in the era of the Internet, where people use slang not the
traditional or standard English which cannot be processed by standard natural language
processing tools. Ritter (2011) [111] proposed the classification of named entities in tweets
because standard NLP tools did not perform well on tweets. They re-built NLP pipeline
starting from PoS tagging, then chunking for NER. It improved the performance in comparison
to standard NLP tools.
Emotion detection investigates and identifies the types of emotion from speech, facial
expressions, gestures, and text. Sharma (2016) [124] analyzed the conversations in Hinglish
means mix of English and Hindi languages and identified the usage patterns of PoS. Their
work was based on identification of language and POS tagging of mixed script. They tried to
detect emotions in mixed script by relating machine learning and human knowledge. They
have categorized sentences into 6 groups based on emotions and used TLBO technique to help

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3724 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

the users in prioritizing their messages based on the emotions attached with the message. Seal
et al. (2020) [120] proposed an efficient emotion detection method by searching emotional
words from a pre-defined emotional keyword database and analyzing the emotion words,
phrasal verbs, and negation words. Their proposed approach exhibited better performance than
recent approaches.
Semantic Role Labeling (SRL) works by giving a semantic role to a sentence. For example,
in the PropBank (Palmer et al., 2005) [100] formalism, one assigns roles to words that are
arguments of a verb in the sentence. The precise arguments depend on the verb frame and if
multiple verbs exist in a sentence, it might have multiple tags. State-of-the-art SRL systems
comprise several stages: creating a parse tree, identifying which parse tree nodes represent the
arguments of a given verb, and finally classifying these nodes to compute the corresponding
SRL tags.
Event discovery in social media feeds (Benson et al.,2011) [13], using a graphical model to
analyze any social media feeds to determine whether it contains the name of a person or name
of a venue, place, time etc. The model operates on noisy feeds of data to extract records of
events by aggregating multiple information across multiple messages, despite the noise of
irrelevant noisy messages and very irregular message language, this model was able to extract
records with a broader array of features on factors.
We first give insights on some of the mentioned tools and relevant work done before
moving to the broad applications of NLP.

3.2 Applications of NLP

Natural Language Processing can be applied into various areas like Machine Translation,
Email Spam detection, Information Extraction, Summarization, Question Answering etc. Next,
we discuss some of the areas with the relevant work done in those directions.

a) Machine Translation

As most of the world is online, the task of making data accessible and available to all is a
challenge. Major challenge in making data accessible is the language barrier. There are a
multitude of languages with different sentence structure and grammar. Machine Translation is
generally translating phrases from one language to another with the help of a statistical engine
like Google Translate. The challenge with machine translation technologies is not directly
translating words but keeping the meaning of sentences intact along with grammar and tenses.
The statistical machine learning gathers as many data as they can find that seems to be parallel
between two languages and they crunch their data to find the likelihood that something in
Language A corresponds to something in Language B. As for Google, in September 2016,
announced a new machine translation system based on artificial neural networks and Deep
learning. In recent years, various methods have been proposed to automatically evaluate
machine translation quality by comparing hypothesis translations with reference translations.
Examples of such methods are word error rate, position-independent word error rate (Tillmann
et al., 1997) [138], generation string accuracy (Bangalore et al., 2000) [8], multi-reference
word error rate (Nießen et al., 2000) [95], BLEU score (Papineni et al., 2002) [101], NIST
score (Doddington, 2002) [35] All these criteria try to approximate human assessment and
often achieve an astonishing degree of correlation to human subjective evaluation of fluency
and adequacy (Papineni et al., 2001; Doddington, 2002) [35, 101].

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3725

b) Text Categorization

Categorization systems input a large flow of data like official documents, military casualty
reports, market data, newswires etc. and assign them to predefined categories or indices. For
example, The Carnegie Group’s Construe system (Hayes, 1991) [54], inputs Reuters articles
and saves much time by doing the work that is to be done by staff or human indexers. Some
companies have been using categorization systems to categorize trouble tickets or complaint
requests and routing to the appropriate desks. Another application of text categorization is
email spam filters. Spam filters are becoming important as the first line of defence against the
unwanted emails. A false negative and false positive issue of spam filters is at the heart of NLP
technology, it has brought down the challenge of extracting meaning from strings of text. A
filtering solution that is applied to an email system uses a set of protocols to determine which
of the incoming messages are spam; and which are not. There are several types of spam filters
available. Content filters: Review the content within the message to determine whether it is
spam or not. Header filters: Review the email header looking for fake information. General
Blacklist filters: Stop all emails from blacklisted recipients. Rules Based Filters: It uses user-
defined criteria. Such as stopping mails from a specific person or stopping mail including a
specific word. Permission Filters: Require anyone sending a message to be pre-approved by
the recipient. Challenge Response Filters: Requires anyone sending a message to enter a code
to gain permission to send email.

c) Spam Filtering

It works using text categorization and in recent times, various machine learning techniques
have been applied to text categorization or Anti-Spam Filtering like Rule Learning (Cohen
1996) [27], Naïve Bayes (Sahami et al., 1998; Androutsopoulos et al., 2000; Rennie.,2000) [5,
109, 115],Memory based Learning (Sakkiset al.,2000b) [117], Support vector machines
(Druker et al., 1999) [36], Decision Trees (Carreras and Marquez, 2001) [19], Maximum
Entropy Model (Berger et al. 1996) [14], Hash Forest and a rule encoding method (T. Xia,
2020) [153], sometimes combining different learners (Sakkis et al., 2001) [116]. Using these
approaches is better as classifier is learned from training data rather than making by hand. The
naïve bayes is preferred because of its performance despite its simplicity (Lewis, 1998) [67] In
Text Categorization two types of models have been used (McCallum and Nigam, 1998) [77].
Both modules assume that a fixed vocabulary is present. But in first model a document is
generated by first choosing a subset of vocabulary and then using the selected words any
number of times, at least once irrespective of order. This is called Multi-variate Bernoulli
model. It takes the information of which words are used in a document irrespective of number
of words and order. In second model, a document is generated by choosing a set of word
occurrences and arranging them in any order. This model is called multi-nomial model, in
addition to the Multi-variate Bernoulli model, it also captures information on how many times
a word is used in a document. Most text categorization approaches to anti-spam Email filtering
have used multi variate Bernoulli model (Androutsopoulos et al., 2000) [5] [15].

d) Information Extraction

Information extraction is concerned with identifying phrases of interest of textual data. For
many applications, extracting entities such as names, places, events, dates, times, and prices is

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3726 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

a powerful way of summarizing the information relevant to a user’s needs. In the case of a
domain specific search engine, the automatic identification of important information can
increase accuracy and efficiency of a directed search. There is use of hidden Markov models
(HMMs) to extract the relevant fields of research papers. These extracted text segments are
used to allow searched over specific fields and to provide effective presentation of search
results and to match references to papers. For example, noticing the pop-up ads on any
websites showing the recent items you might have looked on an online store with discounts.
In Information Retrieval two types of models have been used (McCallum and Nigam, 1998)
[77]. Both modules assume that a fixed vocabulary is present. But in first model a document is
generated by first choosing a subset of vocabulary and then using the selected words any
number of times, at least once without any order. This is called Multi-variate Bernoulli model.
It takes the information of which words are used in a document irrespective of number of
words and order. In second model, a document is generated by choosing a set of word
occurrences and arranging them in any order. This model is called multi-nominal model, in
addition to the Multi-variate Bernoulli model, it also captures information on how many times
a word is used in a document.
Discovery of knowledge is becoming important areas of research over the recent years.
Knowledge discovery research use a variety of techniques to extract useful information from
source documents like Parts of Speech (POS) tagging, Chunking or Shadow Parsing, Stop-
words (Keywords that are used and must be removed before processing documents), Stemming
(Mapping words to some base for, it has two methods, dictionary-based stemming and Porter
style stemming (Porter, 1980) [103]. Former one has higher accuracy but higher cost of
implementation while latter has lower implementation cost and is usually insufficient for
IR). Compound or Statistical Phrases (Compounds and statistical phrases index multi token
units instead of single tokens.) Word Sense Disambiguation (Word sense disambiguation is the
task of understanding the correct sense of a word in context. When used for information
retrieval, terms are replaced by their senses in the document vector.)
The extracted information can be applied for a variety of purposes, for example to prepare a
summary, to build databases, identify keywords, classifying text items according to some pre-
defined categories etc. For example, CONSTRUE, it was developed for Reuters, that is used in
classifying news stories (Hayes, 1992) [54]. It has been suggested that many IE systems can
successfully extract terms from documents, acquiring relations between the terms is still a
difficulty. PROMETHEE is a system that extracts lexico-syntactic patterns relative to a
specific conceptual relation (Morin,1999) [89]. IE systems should work at many levels, from
word recognition to discourse analysis at the level of the complete document. An application
of the Blank Slate Language Processor (BSLP) (Bondale et al., 1999) [16] approach for the
analysis of a real-life natural language corpus that consists of responses to open-ended
questionnaires in the field of advertising.
There is a system called MITA (Metlife’s Intelligent Text Analyzer) (Glasgow et al. (1998)
[48]) that extracts information from life insurance applications. Ahonen et al. (1998) [1]
suggested a mainstream framework for text mining that uses pragmatic and discourse level
analyses of text.

e) Summarization

Overload of information is the real thing in this digital age, and already our reach and access to
knowledge and information exceeds our capacity to understand it. This trend is not slowing

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3727

down, so an ability to summarize the data while keeping the meaning intact is highly
required. This is important not just allowing us the ability to recognize the understand
the important information for a large set of data, it is used to understand the deeper
emotional meanings; For example, a company determines the general sentiment on social
media and uses it on their latest product offering. This application is useful as a valuable
marketing asset.
The types of text summarization depends on the basis of the number of documents and the
two important categories are single document summarization and multi document summari-
zation (Zajic et al. 2008 [159]; Fattah and Ren 2009 [43]).Summaries can also be of two types:
generic or query-focused (Gong and Liu 2001 [50]; Dunlavy et al. 2007 [37]; Wan 2008 [144];
Ouyang et al. 2011 [99]).Summarization task can be either supervised or unsupervised (Mani
and Maybury 1999 [74]; Fattah and Ren 2009 [43]; Riedhammer et al. 2010 [110]). Training
data is required in a supervised system for selecting relevant material from the documents.
Large amount of annotated data is needed for learning techniques. Few techniques are as
follows–

– Bayesian Sentence based Topic Model (BSTM) uses both term-sentences and term
document associations for summarizing multiple documents. (Wang et al. 2009 [146])
– Factorization with Given Bases (FGB) is a language model where sentence bases are the
given bases and it utilizes document-term and sentence term matrices. This approach
groups and summarizes the documents simultaneously. (Wang et al. 2011) [147])
– Topic Aspect-Oriented Summarization (TAOS) is based on topic factors. These topic
factors are various features that describe topics such as capital words are used to represent
entity. Various topics can have various aspects and various preferences of features are
used to represent various aspects. (Fang et al. 2015 [42])

f) Dialogue System

Dialogue systems are very prominent in real world applications ranging from providing
support to performing a particular action. In case of support dialogue systems, context
awareness is required whereas in case to perform an action, it doesn’t require much context
awareness. Earlier dialogue systems were focused on small applications such as home theater
systems. These dialogue systems utilize phonemic and lexical levels of language. Habitable
dialogue systems offer potential for fully automated dialog systems by utilizing all levels of a
language. (Liddy, 2001) [68].This leads to producing systems that can enable robots to interact
with humans in natural languages such as Google’s assistant, Windows Cortana, Apple’s Siri
and Amazon’s Alexa etc.

g) Medicine

NLP is applied in the field as well. The Linguistic String Project-Medical Language Processor
is one the large scale projects of NLP in the field of medicine [21, 53, 57, 71, 114]. The LSP-
MLP helps enabling physicians to extract and summarize information of any signs or
symptoms, drug dosage and response data with the aim of identifying possible side effects
of any medicine while highlighting or flagging data items [114]. The National Library of
Medicine is developing The Specialist System [78–80, 82, 84]. It is expected to function as an
Information Extraction tool for Biomedical Knowledge Bases, particularly Medline abstracts.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3728 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

The lexicon was created using MeSH (Medical Subject Headings), Dorland’s Illustrated
Medical Dictionary and general English Dictionaries. The Centre d’Informatique Hospitaliere
of the Hopital Cantonal de Geneve is working on an electronic archiving environment with
NLP features [81, 119]. In the first phase, patient records were archived. At later stage the
LSP-MLP has been adapted for French [10, 72, 94, 113], and finally, a proper NLP system
called RECIT [9, 11, 17, 106] has been developed using a method called Proximity Processing
[88]. It’s task was to implement a robust and multilingual system able to analyze/comprehend
medical sentences, and to preserve a knowledge of free text into a language independent
knowledge representation [107, 108]. The Columbia university of New York has developed an
NLP system called MEDLEE (MEDical Language Extraction and Encoding System) that
identifies clinical information in narrative reports and transforms the textual information into
structured representation [45].

3.3 NLP in talk

We next discuss some of the recent NLP projects implemented by various companies:

a) ACE Powered GDPR Robot Launched by RAVN Systems [134]

RAVN Systems, a leading expert in Artificial Intelligence (AI), Search and Knowledge
Management Solutions, announced the launch of a RAVN (“Applied Cognitive Engine”)
i.e. powered software Robot to help and facilitate the GDPR (“General Data Protection
Regulation”) compliance. The Robot uses AI techniques to automatically analyze documents
and other types of data in any business system which is subject to GDPR rules. It allows users
to search, retrieve, flag, classify, and report on data, mediated to be super sensitive under
GDPR quickly and easily. Users also can identify personal data from documents, view feeds
on the latest personal data that requires attention and provide reports on the data suggested to
be deleted or secured. RAVN’s GDPR Robot is also able to hasten requests for information
(Data Subject Access Requests - “DSAR”) in a simple and efficient way, removing the need
for a physical approach to these requests which tends to be very labor thorough. Peter
Wallqvist, CSO at RAVN Systems commented, “GDPR compliance is of universal para-
mountcy as it will be exploited by any organization that controls and processes data concern-
ing EU citizens.
Link: http://markets.financialcontent.com/stocks/news/read/33888795/RAVN_Systems_
Launch_the_ACE_Powered_GDPR_Robot

b) Eno A Natural Language Chatbot Launched by Capital One [56]

Capital One announces a chatbot for customers called Eno. Eno is a natural language chatbot
that people socialize through texting. CapitalOne claims that Eno is First natural language
SMS chatbot from a U.S. bank that allows customers to ask questions using natural language.
Customers can interact with Eno asking questions about their savings and others using a text
interface. Eno makes such an environment that it feels that a human is interacting. This
provides a different platform than other brands that launch chatbots like Facebook Messenger
and Skype. They believed that Facebook has too much access to private information of a
person, which could get them into trouble with privacy laws U.S. financial institutions work
under. Like Facebook Page admin can access full transcripts of the bot’s conversations. If that

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3729

would be the case then the admins could easily view the personal banking information of
customers with is not correct.
Link: https://www.macobserver.com/analysis/capital-one-natural-language-chatbot-eno/

c) Future of BI in Natural Language Processing [140]

Several companies in BI spaces are trying to get with the trend and trying hard to ensure that
data becomes more friendly and easily accessible. But still there is a long way for this.BI will
also make it easier to access as GUI is not needed. Because nowadays the queries are made by
text or voice command on smartphones.one of the most common examples is Google might
tell you today what tomorrow’s weather will be. But soon enough, we will be able to ask our
personal data chatbot about customer sentiment today, and how we feel about their brand next
week; all while walking down the street. Today, NLP tends to be based on turning natural
language into machine language. But with time the technology matures – especially the AI
component –the computer will get better at “understanding” the query and start to deliver
answers rather than search results. Initially, the data chatbot will probably ask the question
‘how have revenues changed over the last three-quarters?’ and then return pages of data for
you to analyze. But once it learns the semantic relations and inferences of the question, it will
be able to automatically perform the filtering and formulation necessary to provide an
intelligible answer, rather than simply showing you data.
Link: http://www.smartdatacollective.com/eran-levy/489410/here-s-why-natural-language-
processing-future-bi

d) Using Natural Language Processing and Network Analysis to Develop a Conceptual

Framework for Medication Therapy Management Research [97]

Natural Language Processing and Network Analysis to Develop a Conceptual Framework for
Medication Therapy Management Research describes a theory derivation process that is used
to develop a conceptual framework for medication therapy management (MTM) research. The
MTM service model and chronic care model are selected as parent theories. Review article
abstracts target medication therapy management in chronic disease care that were retrieved
from Ovid Medline (2000–2016). Unique concepts in each abstract are extracted using Meta
Map and their pair-wise co-occurrence are determined. Then the information is used to
construct a network graph of concept co-occurrence that is further analyzed to identify content
for the new conceptual model. 142 abstracts are analyzed. Medication adherence is the most
studied drug therapy problem and co-occurred with concepts related to patient-centered
interventions targeting self-management. The enhanced model consists of 65 concepts clus-
tered into 14 constructs. The framework requires additional refinement and evaluation to
determine its relevance and applicability across a broad audience including underserved
settings.
Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28269895?dopt=Abstract

e) Meet the Pilot, world’s first language translating earbuds [96]

The world’s first smart earpiece Pilot will soon be transcribed over 15 languages. According to
Spring wise, Waverly Labs’ Pilot can already transliterate five spoken languages, English,
French, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish, and seven written affixed languages, German, Hindi,

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3730 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

Russian, Japanese, Arabic, Korean and Mandarin Chinese. The Pilot earpiece is connected via
Bluetooth to the Pilot speech translation app, which uses speech recognition, machine
translation and machine learning and speech synthesis technology. Simultaneously, the
user will hear the translated version of the speech on the second earpiece. Moreover, it is
not necessary that conversation would be taking place between two people; only the
users can join in and discuss as a group. As if now the user may experience a few second
lag interpolated the speech and translation, which Waverly Labs pursue to reduce. The
Pilot earpiece will be available from September but can be pre-ordered now for $249.
The earpieces can also be used for streaming music, answering voice calls, and getting
audio notifications.
Link: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/meet-the-pilot-smart-earpiece-language-
translator-headphones-travel#/

4 Datasets in NLP and state-of-the-art models

The objective of this section is to present the various datasets used in NLP and some state-of-
the-art models in NLP.

4.1 Datasets in NLP

Corpus is a collection of linguistic data, either compiled from written texts or transcribed from
recorded speech. Corpora are intended primarily for testing linguistic hypotheses - e.g., to
determine how a certain sound, word, or syntactic construction is used across a culture or
language. There are various types of corpus: In an annotated corpus, the implicit information in
the plain text has been made explicit by specific annotations. Un-annotated corpus contains
raw state of plain text. Different languages can be compared using a reference corpus. Monitor
corpora are non-finite collections of texts which are mostly used in lexicography. Multilingual
corpus refers to a type of corpus that contains small collections of monolingual corpora
based on the same sampling procedure and categories for different languages. Parallel
corpus contains texts in one language and their translations into other languages which
are aligned sentence phrase by phrase. Reference corpus contains text of spoken (formal
and informal) and written (formal and informal) language which represents various social
and situational contexts. Speech corpus contains recorded speech and transcriptions of
recording and the time each word occurred in the recorded speech. There are various
datasets available for natural language processing; some of these are listed below for
different use cases:

1. Sentiment Analysis: Sentiment analysis is a rapidly expanding field of natural language

processing (NLP) used in a variety of fields such as politics, business etc. Majorly used
datasets for sentiment analysis are:

a) Stanford Sentiment Treebank (SST): Socher et al. introduced SST containing sentiment
labels for 215,154 phrases in parse trees for 11,855 sentences from movie reviews posing
novel sentiment compositional difficulties [127].
b) Sentiment140: It contains 1.6 million tweets annotated with negative, neutral and positive
labels.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3731

c) Paper Reviews: It provides reviews of computing and informatics conferences written in

English and Spanish languages. It has 405 reviews which are evaluated on a 5-point scale
ranging from very negative to very positive.
d) IMDB: For natural language processing, text analytics, and sentiment analysis, this
dataset offers thousands of movie reviews split into training and test datasets. This dataset
was introduced in by Mass et al. in 2011 [73].
e) G.Rama Rohit Reddy of the Language Technologies Research Centre, KCIS, IIIT
Hyderabad, generated the corpus “Sentiraama.” The corpus is divided into four datasets,
each of which is annotated with a two-value scale that distinguishes between positive and
negative sentiment at the document level. The corpus contains data from a variety of
fields, including book reviews, product reviews, movie reviews, and song lyrics. The
annotators meticulously followed the annotation technique for each of them. The folder
“Song Lyrics” in the corpus contains 339 Telugu song lyrics written in Telugu script
[121].

2. Language Modelling: Language models analyse text data to calculate word probability.
They use an algorithm to interpret the data, which establishes rules for context in natural
language. The model then uses these rules to accurately predict or construct new
sentences. The model basically learns the basic characteristics and features of language
and then applies them to new phrases. Majorly used datasets for Language modeling are
as follows:

a) Salesforce’s WikiText-103 dataset has 103 million tokens collected from 28,475 featured
articles from Wikipedia.
b) WikiText-2 is a scaled-down version of WikiText-103. It contains 2 million tokens with a
33,278 jargon size.
c) Penn Treebank piece of the Wall Street Diary corpus includes 929,000 tokens for training,
73,000 tokens for validation, and 82,000 tokens for testing purposes. Its context is limited
since it comprises sentences rather than paragraphs [76].
d) The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology’s Technology Development
Programme for Indian Languages (TDIL) launched its own data distribution portal (www.
tdil-dc.in) which has cataloged datasets [24].

3. Machine Translation: The task of converting the text of one natural language into another
language while keeping the sense of the input text is known as machine translation.
Majorly used datasets are as follows:

a) Tatoeba is a collection of multilingual sentence pairings. A tab-delimited pair of an

English text sequence and the translated French text sequence appears on each line of
the dataset. Each text sequence might be as simple as a single sentence or as complex as a
paragraph of many sentences.
b) The Europarl parallel corpus is derived from the European Parliament’s proceedings. It is
available in 21 European languages [40].
c) WMT14 provides machine translation pairs for English-German and English-French.
Separately, these datasets comprise 4.5 million and 35 million sentence sets. Byte-Pair
Encoding with 32 K tasks is used to encode the phrases.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3732 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

d) There are around 160,000 sentence pairings in the IWSLT 14. The dataset includes
descriptions in English-German (En-De) and German-English (De-En) languages. There
are around 200 K training sentence sets in the IWSLT 13 dataset.
e) The IIT Bombay English-Hindi corpus comprises parallel corpora for English-Hindi as
well as monolingual Hindi corpora gathered from several existing sources and corpora
generated over time at IIT Bombay’s Centre for Indian Language Technology.

4. Question Answering System: Question answering systems provide real-time responses

which are widely used in customer care services. The datasets used for dialogue system/
question answering system are as follows:

a) Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD): it is a reading comprehension dataset

made up of questions posed by crowd workers on a collection of Wikipedia articles.
b) Natural Questions: It is a large-scale corpus presented by Google used for training and
assessing open-domain question answering systems. It includes 300,000 naturally occur-
ring queries as well as human-annotated responses from Wikipedia pages for use in QA
system training.
c) Question Answering in Context (QuAC): This dataset is used to describe, comprehend,
and participate in information seeking conversation. In this dataset, instances are made up
of an interactive discussion between two crowd workers: a student who asks a series of
open-ended questions about an unknown Wikipedia text, and a teacher who responds by
offering brief extracts from the text.

The neural learning models are overtaking traditional models for NLP [64, 127]. In [64],
authors used CNN (Convolutional Neural Network) model for sentiment analysis of movie
reviews and achieved 81.5% accuracy. The results illustrate that using CNN was an appro-
priate replacement for state-of-the-art methods. Authors [127] have combined SST and
Recursive Neural Tensor Network for sentiment analysis of the single sentence. This model
amplifies the accuracy by 5.4% for sentence classification compared to traditional NLP
models. Authors [135] proposed a combined Recurrent Neural Network and Transformer
model for sentiment analysis. This hybrid model was tested on three different datasets: Twitter
US Airline Sentiment, IMDB, and Sentiment 140: and achieved F1 scores of 91%, 93%, and
90%, respectively. This model’s performance outshined the state-of-art methods.
Santoro et al. [118] introduced a rational recurrent neural network with the capacity to learn
on classifying the information and perform complex reasoning based on the interactions
between compartmentalized information. They used the relational memory core to handle
such interactions. Finally, the model was tested for language modeling on three different
datasets (GigaWord, Project Gutenberg, and WikiText-103). Further, they mapped the perfor-
mance of their model to traditional approaches for dealing with relational reasoning on
compartmentalized information. The results achieved with RMC show improved performance.
Merity et al. [86] extended conventional word-level language models based on Quasi-
Recurrent Neural Network and LSTM to handle the granularity at character and word level.
They tuned the parameters for character-level modeling using Penn Treebank dataset and
word-level modeling using WikiText-103. In both cases, their model outshined the state-of-art
methods.
Luong et al. [70] used neural machine translation on the WMT14 dataset and performed
translation of English text to French text. The model demonstrated a significant improvement

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3733

of up to 2.8 bi-lingual evaluation understudy (BLEU) scores compared to various neural

machine translation systems. It outperformed the commonly used MT system on a WMT 14
dataset.
Fan et al. [41] introduced a gradient-based neural architecture search algorithm that
automatically finds architecture with better performance than a transformer, conventional
NMT models. They tested their model on WMT14 (English-German Translation), IWSLT14
(German-English translation), and WMT18 (Finnish-to-English translation) and achieved
30.1, 36.1, and 26.4 BLEU points, which shows better performance than Transformer
baselines.
Wiese et al. [150] introduced a deep learning approach based on domain adaptation
techniques for handling biomedical question answering tasks. Their model revealed the
state-of-the-art performance on biomedical question answers, and the model outperformed
the state-of-the-art methods in domains.
Seunghak et al. [158] designed a Memory-Augmented-Machine-Comprehension-Network
(MAMCN) to handle dependencies faced in reading comprehension. The model achieved
state-of-the-art performance on document-level using TriviaQA and QUASAR-T datasets, and
paragraph-level using SQuAD datasets.
Xie et al. [154] proposed a neural architecture where candidate answers and their repre-
sentation learning are constituent centric, guided by a parse tree. Under this architecture, the
search space of candidate answers is reduced while preserving the hierarchical, syntactic, and
compositional structure among constituents. Using SQuAD, the model delivers state-of-the-art
performance.

4.2 State-of-the-art models in NLP

Rationalist approach or symbolic approach assumes that a crucial part of the knowledge in the
human mind is not derived by the senses but is firm in advance, probably by genetic
inheritance. Noam Chomsky was the strongest advocate of this approach. It was believed that
machines can be made to function like the human brain by giving some fundamental
knowledge and reasoning mechanism linguistics knowledge is directly encoded in rule or
other forms of representation. This helps the automatic process of natural languages [92].
Statistical and machine learning entail evolution of algorithms that allow a program to infer
patterns. An iterative process is used to characterize a given algorithm’s underlying algorithm
that is optimized by a numerical measure that characterizes numerical parameters and learning
phase. Machine-learning models can be predominantly categorized as either generative or
discriminative. Generative methods can generate synthetic data because of which they create
rich models of probability distributions. Discriminative methods are more functional and have
right estimating posterior probabilities and are based on observations. Srihari [129] explains
the different generative models as one with a resemblance that is used to spot an unknown
speaker’s language and would bid the deep knowledge of numerous languages to perform the
match. Discriminative methods rely on a less knowledge-intensive approach and using
distinction between languages. Whereas generative models can become troublesome when
many features are used and discriminative models allow use of more features [38]. Few of the
examples of discriminative methods are Logistic regression and conditional random fields
(CRFs), generative methods are Naive Bayes classifiers and hidden Markov models (HMMs).

(a) Naive Bayes Classifiers

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3734 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

Naive Bayes is a probabilistic algorithm which is based on probability theory and Bayes’
Theorem to predict the tag of a text such as news or customer review. It helps to calculate the
probability of each tag for the given text and return the tag with the highest probability. Bayes’
Theorem is used to predict the probability of a feature based on prior knowledge of conditions
that might be related to that feature. The choice of area in NLP using Naïve Bayes Classifiers
could be in usual tasks such as segmentation and translation but it is also explored in unusual
areas like segmentation for infant learning and identifying documents for opinions and facts.
Anggraeni et al. (2019) [61] used ML and AI to create a question-and-answer system for
retrieving information about hearing loss. They developed I-Chat Bot which understands the
user input and provides an appropriate response and produces a model which can be used in
the search for information about required hearing impairments. The problem with naïve bayes
is that we may end up with zero probabilities when we meet words in the test data for a certain
class that are not present in the training data.

(b) Hidden Markov Model (HMM)

An HMM is a system where a shifting takes place between several states, generating feasible
output symbols with each switch. The sets of viable states and unique symbols may be large,
but finite and known. We can describe the outputs, but the system’s internals are hidden. Few
of the problems could be solved by Inference A certain sequence of output symbols, compute
the probabilities of one or more candidate states with sequences. Patterns matching the state-
switch sequence are most likely to have generated a particular output-symbol sequence.
Training the output-symbol chain data, reckon the state-switch/output probabilities that fit
this data best.
Hidden Markov Models are extensively used for speech recognition, where the output
sequence is matched to the sequence of individual phonemes. HMM is not restricted to this
application; it has several others such as bioinformatics problems, for example, multiple
sequence alignment [128]. Sonnhammer mentioned that Pfam holds multiple alignments and
hidden Markov model-based profiles (HMM-profiles) of entire protein domains. The cue of
domain boundaries, family members and alignment are done semi-automatically found on
expert knowledge, sequence similarity, other protein family databases and the capability of
HMM-profiles to correctly identify and align the members. HMM may be used for a variety of
NLP applications, including word prediction, sentence production, quality assurance, and
intrusion detection systems [133].

(c) Neural Network

Earlier machine learning techniques such as Naïve Bayes, HMM etc. were majorly used for
NLP but by the end of 2010, neural networks transformed and enhanced NLP tasks by learning
multilevel features. Major use of neural networks in NLP is observed for word embedding
where words are represented in the form of vectors. These vectors can be used to recognize
similar words by observing their closeness in this vector space, other uses of neural networks
are observed in information retrieval, text summarization, text classification, machine transla-
tion, sentiment analysis and speech recognition. Initially focus was on feedforward [49] and
CNN (convolutional neural network) architecture [69] but later researchers adopted recurrent
neural networks to capture the context of a word with respect to surrounding words of a
sentence. LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory), a variant of RNN, is used in various tasks such

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3735

as word prediction, and sentence topic prediction. [47] In order to observe the word arrange-
ment in forward and backward direction, bi-directional LSTM is explored by researchers [59].
In case of machine translation, encoder-decoder architecture is used where dimensionality of
input and output vector is not known. Neural networks can be used to anticipate a state that has
not yet been seen, such as future states for which predictors exist whereas HMM predicts
hidden states.

(d) BERT

Bi-directional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) is a pre-trained model with

unlabeled text available on BookCorpus and English Wikipedia. This can be fine-tuned to
capture context for various NLP tasks such as question answering, sentiment analysis, text
classification, sentence embedding, interpreting ambiguity in the text etc. [25, 33, 90, 148].
Earlier language-based models examine the text in either of one direction which is used for
sentence generation by predicting the next word whereas the BERT model examines the text in
both directions simultaneously for better language understanding. BERT provides contextual
embedding for each word present in the text unlike context-free models (word2vec and
GloVe). For example, in the sentences “he is going to the riverbank for a walk” and “he is
going to the bank to withdraw some money”, word2vec will have one vector representation for
“bank” in both the sentences whereas BERT will have different vector representation for
“bank”. Muller et al. [90] used the BERT model to analyze the tweets on covid-19 content.
The use of the BERT model in the legal domain was explored by Chalkidis et al. [20].
Since BERT considers up to 512 tokens, this is the reason if there is a long text sequence
that must be divided into multiple short text sequences of 512 tokens. This is the limitation of
BERT as it lacks in handling large text sequences.

5 Evaluation metrics and challenges

The objective of this section is to discuss evaluation metrics used to evaluate the model’s
performance and involved challenges.

5.1 Evaluation metrics

Since the number of labels in most classification problems is fixed, it is easy to determine the
score for each class and, as a result, the loss from the ground truth. In image generation
problems, the output resolution and ground truth are both fixed. As a result, we can calculate
the loss at the pixel level using ground truth. But in NLP, though output format is
predetermined in the case of NLP, dimensions cannot be specified. It is because a single
statement can be expressed in multiple ways without changing the intent and meaning of that
statement. Evaluation metrics are important to evaluate the model’s performance if we were
trying to solve two problems with one model.

a) BLEU (BiLingual Evaluation Understudy) Score: Each word in the output sentence is
scored 1 if it appears in either of the reference sentences and a 0 if it does not. Further the
number of words that appeared in one of the reference translations is divided by the total
number of words in the output sentence to normalize the count so that it is always between

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3736 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

0 and 1. For example, if ground truth is “He is playing chess in the backyard” and output
sentences are S1: “He is playing tennis in the backyard”, S2: “He is playing badminton in
the backyard”, S3: “He is playing movie in the backyard” and S4: “backyard backyard
backyard backyard backyard backyard backyard”. The score of S1, S2 and S3 would be
6/7,6/7 and 6/7. All sentences are getting the same score though information in S1 and S3
is not same. This is because BELU considers words in a sentence contribute equally to the
meaning of a sentence which is not the case in real-world scenario. Using combination of
uni-gram, bi-gram and n-grams, we can to capture the order of a sentence. We may also
set a limit on how many times each word is counted based on how many times it appears
in each reference phrase, which helps us prevent excessive repetition.
b) GLUE (General Language Understanding Evaluation) score: Previously, NLP models
were almost usually built to perform effectively on a unique job. Various models such as
LSTM, Bi-LSTM were trained solely for this task, and very rarely generalized to other
tasks. The model which is used for named entity recognition can perform for textual
entailment. GLUE is a set of datasets for training, assessing, and comparing NLP models.
It includes nine diverse task datasets designed to test a model’s language understanding.
To acquire a comprehensive assessment of a model’s performance, GLUE tests the model
on a variety of tasks rather than a single one. Single-sentence tasks, similarity and
paraphrase tasks, and inference tasks are among them. For example, in sentiment analysis
of customer reviews, we might be interested in analyzing ambiguous reviews and
determining which product the client is referring to in his reviews. Thus, the model
obtains a good “knowledge” of language in general after some generalized pre-training.
When the time comes to test out a model to meet a given task, this universal “knowledge”
gives us an advantage. With GLUE, researchers can evaluate their model and score it on
all nine tasks. The final performance score model is the average of those nine scores. It
makes little difference how the model looks or works if it can analyze inputs and predict
outcomes for all the activities.

Considering these metrics in mind, it helps to evaluate the performance of an NLP model for a
particular task or a variety of tasks.

5.2 Challenges

The applications of NLP have been growing day by day, and with these new challenges are
also occurring despite a lot of work done in the recent past. Some of the common challenges
are: Contextual words and phrases in the language where same words and phrases can have
different meanings in a sentence which are easy for the humans to understand but makes a
challenging task. Such type of challenges can also be faced with dealing Synonyms in the
language because humans use many different words to express the same idea, also in the
language different levels of complexity such as large, huge, and big may be used by the
different persons which become a challenging task to process the language and design
algorithms to adopt all these issues. Further in language, Homonyms, the words used to be
pronounced the same but have different definitions are also problematic for question answer-
ing and speech-to-text applications because they aren’t written in text form. Sentences using
sarcasm and irony sometimes may be understood in the opposite way by the humans, and so
designing models to deal with such sentences is a really challenging task in NLP. Furthermore,
the sentences in the language having any type of ambiguity in the sense of interpreting in more

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3737

than one way is also an area to work upon where more accuracy can be achieved. Language
containing informal phrases, expressions, idioms, and culture-specific lingo make difficult to
design models intended for the broad use, however having a lot of data on which training and
updating on regular basis may improve the models, but it is a really challenging task to deal
with the words having different meaning in different geographic areas. In fact, such types of
issues also occur in dealing with different domains such as the meaning of words or sentences
may be different in the education industry but have different meaning in health, law, defense
etc. So, the models for NLP may be working good for an individual domain, geographic area
but for a broad use such challenges need to be tackled. Further together with the above-
mentioned challenges misspelled or misused words can also create a problem, although
autocorrect and grammar corrections applications have improved a lot due to the continuous
developments in the direction but predicting the intention of the writer that to from a specific
domain, geographic area by considering sarcasm, expressions, informal phrases etc. is really a
big challenge. There is no doubt that for most common widely used languages models for NLP
have been doing very well, and further improving day by day but still there is a need for
models for all the persons rather than specific knowledge of a particular language and
technology. One may further refer to the work of Sharifirad and Matwin (2019) [123] for
classification of different online harassment categories and challenges, Baclic et.al. (2020) [6]
and Wong et al. (2018) [151] for challenges and opportunities in public health, Kang et.al.
(2020) [63] for detailed literature survey and technological challenges relevant to management
research and NLP, and a recent review work by Alshemali and Kalita (2020) [3], and
references cited there in.
In the recent past, models dealing with Visual Commonsense Reasoning [31] and NLP
have also been getting attention of the several researchers and seems a promising and
challenging area to work upon. These models try to extract the information from an image,
video using a visual reasoning paradigm such as the humans can infer from a given image,
video beyond what is visually obvious, such as objects’ functions, people’s intents, and mental
states. In this direction, recently Wen and Peng (2020) [149] suggested a model to capture
knowledge from different perspectives, and perceive common sense in advance, and the results
based on the conducted experiments on visual commonsense reasoning dataset VCR seems
very satisfactory and effective. The work of Peng and Chi (2019) [102], that proposes Domain
Adaptation with Scene Graph approach to transfer knowledge from the source domain with the
objective to improve cross-media retrieval in the target domain, and Yen et al. (2019) [155] is
also very useful to further explore the use of NLP and in its relevant domains.

6 Conclusion

This paper is written with three objectives. The first objective gives insights of the various
important terminologies of NLP and NLG, and can be useful for the readers interested to start
their early career in NLP and work relevant to its applications. The second objective of this
paper focuses on the history, applications, and recent developments in the field of NLP. The
third objective is to discuss datasets, approaches and evaluation metrics used in NLP. The
relevant work done in the existing literature with their findings and some of the important
applications and projects in NLP are also discussed in the paper. The last two objectives may
serve as a literature survey for the readers already working in the NLP and relevant fields, and
further can provide motivation to explore the fields mentioned in this paper. It is to be noticed

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3738 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

that even though a great amount of work on natural language processing is available in
literature surveys (one may refer to [15, 32, 63, 98, 133, 151] focusing on one domain such
as usage of deep-learning techniques in NLP, techniques used for email spam filtering,
medication safety, management research, intrusion detection, and Gujarati language etc.), still
there is not much work on regional languages, which can be the focus of future research.

Acknowledgements Authors would like to express the gratitude to Research Mentors from CL Educate:
Accendere Knowledge Management Services Pvt. Ltd. for their comments on earlier versions of the manuscript.
Although any errors are our own and should not tarnish the reputations of these esteemed persons. We would also
like to appreciate the Editor, Associate Editor, and anonymous referees for their constructive suggestions that led
to many improvements on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Declarations

Conflict of interest The first draft of this paper was written under the supervision of Dr. Kiran Khatter and Dr.
Sukhdev Singh, associated with CL- Educate: Accendere Knowledge Management Services Pvt. Ltd. and
deputed at the Manav Rachna International University. The draft is also available on arxiv.org at https://arxiv.
org/abs/1708.05148

References

1. Ahonen H, Heinonen O, Klemettinen M, Verkamo AI (1998) Applying data mining techniques for
descriptive phrase extraction in digital document collections. In research and technology advances in
digital libraries, 1998. ADL 98. Proceedings. IEEE international forum on (pp. 2-11). IEEE
2. Alshawi H (1992) The core language engine. MIT press
3. Alshemali B, Kalita J (2020) Improving the reliability of deep neural networks in NLP: A review. Knowl-
Based Syst 191:105210
4. Andreev ND (1967) The intermediary language as the focal point of machine translation. In: Booth AD
(ed) Machine translation. North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, pp 3–27
5. Androutsopoulos I, Paliouras G, Karkaletsis V, Sakkis G, Spyropoulos CD, Stamatopoulos P (2000)
Learning to filter spam e-mail: A comparison of a naive bayesian and a memory-based approach. arXiv
preprint cs/0009009
6. Baclic O, Tunis M, Young K, Doan C, Swerdfeger H, Schonfeld J (2020) Artificial intelligence in public
health: challenges and opportunities for public health made possible by advances in natural language
processing. Can Commun Dis Rep 46(6):161
7. Bahdanau D, Cho K, Bengio Y (2015) Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and
translate. In ICLR 2015
8. Bangalore S, Rambow O, Whittaker S (2000) Evaluation metrics for generation. In proceedings of the first
international conference on natural language generation-volume 14 (pp. 1-8). Assoc Comput Linguist
9. Baud RH, Rassinoux AM, Scherrer JR (1991) Knowledge representation of discharge summaries. In
AIME 91 (pp. 173–182). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
10. Baud RH, Rassinoux AM, Scherrer JR (1992) Natural language processing and semantical representation
of medical texts. Methods Inf Med 31(2):117–125
11. Baud RH, Alpay L, Lovis C (1994) Let’s meet the users with natural language understanding. Knowledge
and Decisions in Health Telematics: The Next Decade 12:103
12. Bengio Y, Ducharme R, Vincent P (2001) A neural probabilistic language model. Proceedings of NIPS
13. Benson E, Haghighi A, Barzilay R (2011) Event discovery in social media feeds. In proceedings of the
49th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: human language technologies-
volume 1 (pp. 389-398). Assoc Comput Linguist
14. Berger AL, Della Pietra SA, Della Pietra VJ (1996) A maximum entropy approach to natural language
processing. Computational Linguistics 22(1):39–71
15. Blanzieri E, Bryl A (2008) A survey of learning-based techniques of email spam filtering. Artif Intell Rev
29(1):63–92

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3739

16. Bondale N, Maloor P, Vaidyanathan A, Sengupta S, Rao PV (1999) Extraction of information from open-
ended questionnaires using natural language processing techniques. Computer Science and Informatics
29(2):15–22
17. Borst F, Sager N, Nhàn NT, Su Y, Lyman M, Tick LJ, ..., Scherrer JR (1989) Analyse automatique de
comptes rendus d'hospitalisation. In Degoulet P, Stephan JC, Venot A, Yvon PJ, rédacteurs. Informatique
et Santé, Informatique et Gestion des Unités de Soins, Comptes Rendus du Colloque AIM-IF, Paris (pp.
246–56). [5]
18. Briscoe EJ, Grover C, Boguraev B, Carroll J (1987) A formalism and environment for the development of
a large grammar of English. IJCAI 87:703–708
19. Carreras X, Marquez L (2001) Boosting trees for anti-spam email filtering. arXiv preprint cs/0109015
20. Chalkidis I, Fergadiotis M, Malakasiotis P, Aletras N, Androutsopoulos I (2020) LEGAL-BERT: the
muppets straight out of law school. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02559
21. Chi EC, Lyman MS, Sager N, Friedman C, Macleod C (1985) A database of computer-structured
narrative: methods of computing complex relations. In proceedings of the annual symposium on computer
application in medical care (p. 221). Am Med Inform Assoc
22. Cho K, Van Merriënboer B, Bahdanau D, Bengio Y, (2014) On the properties of neural machine
translation: encoder-decoder approaches. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1259
23. Chomsky N (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
24. Choudhary N (2021) LDC-IL: the Indian repository of resources for language technology. Lang Resources
& Evaluation 55:855–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-020-09523-3
25. Chouikhi H, Chniter H, Jarray F (2021) Arabic sentiment analysis using BERT model. In international
conference on computational collective intelligence (pp. 621-632). Springer, Cham
26. Chung J, Gulcehre C, Cho K, Bengio Y, (2014) Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks
on sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.3555
27. Cohen WW (1996) Learning rules that classify e-mail. In AAAI spring symposium on machine learning in
information access (Vol. 18, p. 25)
28. Cohen PR, Morgan J, Ramsay AM (2002) Intention in communication, Am J Psychol 104(4)
29. Collobert R, Weston J (2008) A unified architecture for natural language processing. In proceedings of the
25th international conference on machine learning (pp. 160–167)
30. Dai Z, Yang Z, Yang Y, Carbonell J, Le QV, Salakhutdinov R, (2019) Transformer-xl: attentive language
models beyond a fixed-length context. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.02860
31. Davis E, Marcus G (2015) Commonsense reasoning and commonsense knowledge in artificial intelli-
gence. Commun ACM 58(9):92–103
32. Desai NP, Dabhi VK (2022) Resources and components for Gujarati NLP systems: a survey. Artif Intell
Rev:1–19
33. Devlin J, Chang MW, Lee K, Toutanova K, (2018) Bert: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for
language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805
34. Diab M, Hacioglu K, Jurafsky D (2004) Automatic tagging of Arabic text: From raw text to base phrase
chunks. In Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2004: Short papers (pp. 149–152). Assoc Computat Linguist
35. Doddington G (2002) Automatic evaluation of machine translation quality using n-gram co-occurrence
statistics. In proceedings of the second international conference on human language technology research
(pp. 138-145). Morgan Kaufmann publishers Inc
36. Drucker H, Wu D, Vapnik VN (1999) Support vector machines for spam categorization. IEEE Trans
Neural Netw 10(5):1048–1054
37. Dunlavy DM, O’Leary DP, Conroy JM, Schlesinger JD (2007) QCS: A system for querying, clustering
and summarizing documents. Inf Process Manag 43(6):1588–1605
38. Elkan C (2008) Log-Linear Models and Conditional Random Fields. http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/welkan/250B/
cikmtutorial.pdf accessed 28 Jun 2017.
39. Emele MC, Dorna M (1998) Ambiguity preserving machine translation using packed representations. In
proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th
international conference on computational linguistics-volume 1 (pp. 365-371). Association for
Computational Linguistics
40. Europarl: A Parallel Corpus for Statistical Machine Translation (2005) Philipp Koehn, MT Summit 2005
41. Fan Y, Tian F, Xia Y, Qin T, Li XY, Liu TY (2020) Searching better architectures for neural machine
translation. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 28:1574–1585
42. Fang H, Lu W, Wu F, Zhang Y, Shang X, Shao J, Zhuang Y (2015) Topic aspect-oriented summarization
via group selection. Neurocomputing 149:1613–1619
43. Fattah MA, Ren F (2009) GA, MR, FFNN, PNN and GMM based models for automatic text summari-
zation. Comput Speech Lang 23(1):126–144

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3740 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

44. Feldman S (1999) NLP meets the jabberwocky: natural language processing in information retrieval.
Online-Weston Then Wilton 23:62–73
45. Friedman C, Cimino JJ, Johnson SB (1993) A conceptual model for clinical radiology reports. In
proceedings of the annual symposium on computer application in medical care (p. 829). Am Med
Inform Assoc
46. Gao T, Dontcheva M, Adar E, Liu Z, Karahalios K DataTone: managing ambiguity in natural language
interfaces for data visualization, UIST ‘15: proceedings of the 28th annual ACM symposium on User
Interface Software & Technology, November 2015, 489–500, https://doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807478
47. Ghosh S, Vinyals O, Strope B, Roy S, Dean T, Heck L (2016) Contextual lstm (clstm) models for large
scale nlp tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.06291
48. Glasgow B, Mandell A, Binney D, Ghemri L, Fisher D (1998) MITA: an information-extraction approach
to the analysis of free-form text in life insurance applications. AI Mag 19(1):59
49. Goldberg Y (2017) Neural network methods for natural language processing. Synthesis lectures on human
language technologies 10(1):1–309
50. Gong Y, Liu X (2001) Generic text summarization using relevance measure and latent semantic analysis.
In proceedings of the 24th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in
information retrieval (pp. 19-25). ACM
51. Green Jr, BF, Wolf AK, Chomsky C, Laughery K (1961) Baseball: an automatic question-answerer. In
papers presented at the may 9-11, 1961, western joint IRE-AIEE-ACM computer conference (pp. 219-
224). ACM
52. Greff K, Srivastava RK, Koutník J, Steunebrink BR, Schmidhuber J (2016) LSTM: A search space
odyssey. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems 28(10):2222–2232
53. Grishman R, Sager N, Raze C, Bookchin B (1973) The linguistic string parser. In proceedings of the
June 4-8, 1973, national computer conference and exposition (pp. 427-434). ACM
54. Hayes PJ (1992) Intelligent high-volume text processing using shallow, domain-specific techniques. Text-
based intelligent systems: current research and practice in information extraction and retrieval, 227-242.
55. Hendrix GG, Sacerdoti ED, Sagalowicz D, Slocum J (1978) Developing a natural language interface to
complex data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 3(2):105–147
56. "Here’s Why Natural Language Processing is the Future of BI (2017) " SmartData Collective. N.p., n.d.
Web. 19
57. Hirschman L, Grishman R, Sager N (1976) From text to structured information: automatic processing of
medical reports. In proceedings of the June 7-10, 1976, national computer conference and exposition (pp.
267-275). ACM
58. Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9(8):1735–1780
59. Huang Z, Xu W, Yu K (2015) Bidirectional LSTM-CRF models for sequence tagging. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1508.01991
60. Hutchins WJ (1986) Machine translation: past, present, future (p. 66). Ellis Horwood, Chichester
61. Jurafsky D, Martin J (2008) H. Speech and language processing. 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ
62. Kamp H, Reyle U (1993) Tense and aspect. In from discourse to logic (pp. 483-689). Springer Netherlands
63. Kang Y, Cai Z, Tan CW, Huang Q, Liu H (2020) Natural language processing (NLP) in management
research: A literature review. Journal of Management Analytics 7(2):139–172
64. Kim Y. (2014) Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5882
65. Knight K, Langkilde I (2000) Preserving ambiguities in generation via automata intersection. In AAAI/
IAAI (pp. 697-702)
66. Lass R (1998) Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts. Cambridge, UK; New York; Melbourne,
Australia: Cambridge University Press. p. 1. ISBN 978–0–521-23728-4. Retrieved 8 January
2011Paperback ISBN 0–521–28183-0
67. Lewis DD (1998) Naive (Bayes) at forty: The independence assumption in information retrieval. In
European conference on machine learning (pp. 4–15). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
68. Liddy ED (2001). Natural language processing
69. Lopez MM, Kalita J (2017) Deep learning applied to NLP. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.03091
70. Luong MT, Sutskever I, Le Q V, Vinyals O, Zaremba W (2014) Addressing the rare word problem in
neural machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.8206
71. Lyman M, Sager N, Friedman C, Chi E (1985) Computer-structured narrative in ambulatory care: its use in
longitudinal review of clinical data. In proceedings of the annual symposium on computer application in
medical care (p. 82). Am Med Inform Assoc
72. Lyman M, Sager N, Chi EC, Tick LJ, Nhan NT, Su Y, ..., Scherrer, J. (1989) Medical Language
Processing for Knowledge Representation and Retrievals. In Proceedings. Symposium on Computer
Applications in Medical Care (pp. 548–553). Am Med Inform Assoc

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3741

73. Maas A, Daly RE, Pham PT, Huang D, Ng AY, Potts C (2011) Learning word vectors for sentiment
analysis. In proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: human
language technologies (pp. 142-150)
74. Mani I, Maybury MT (eds) (1999) Advances in automatic text summarization, vol 293. MIT press,
Cambridge, MA
75. Manning CD, Schütze H (1999) Foundations of statistical natural language processing, vol 999. MIT
press, Cambridge
76. Marcus MP, Marcinkiewicz MA, Santorini B (1993) Building a large annotated corpus of english: the
penn treebank. Comput Linguist 19(2):313–330
77. McCallum A, Nigam K (1998) A comparison of event models for naive bayes text classification. In AAAI-
98 workshop on learning for text categorization (Vol. 752, pp. 41-48)
78. McCray AT (1991) Natural language processing for intelligent information retrieval. In Engineering in
Medicine and Biology Society, 1991. Vol. 13: 1991., Proceedings of the Annual International Conference
of the IEEE (pp. 1160–1161). IEEE
79. McCray AT (1991) Extending a natural language parser with UMLS knowledge. In proceedings of the
annual symposium on computer application in medical care (p. 194). Am Med Inform Assoc
80. McCray AT, Nelson SJ (1995) The representation of meaning in the UMLS. Methods Inf Med 34(1–2):
193–201
81. McCray AT, Razi A (1994) The UMLS knowledge source server. Medinfo MedInfo 8:144–147
82. McCray AT, Srinivasan S, Browne AC (1994) Lexical methods for managing variation in biomedical
terminologies. In proceedings of the annual symposium on computer application in medical care (p. 235).
Am Med Inform Assoc
83. McDonald R, Crammer K, Pereira F (2005) Flexible text segmentation with structured multilabel
classification. In proceedings of the conference on human language technology and empirical methods
in natural language processing (pp. 987-994). Assoc Comput Linguist
84. McGray AT, Sponsler JL, Brylawski B, Browne AC (1987) The role of lexical knowledge in biomedical
text understanding. In proceedings of the annual symposium on computer application in medical care (p.
103). Am Med Inform Assoc
85. McKeown KR (1985) Text generation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
86. Merity S, Keskar NS, Socher R (2018) An analysis of neural language modeling at multiple scales. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1803.08240
87. Mikolov T, Chen K, Corrado G., & Dean, J. (2013). Distributed representations of words and phrases and
their compositionality. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems
88. Morel-Guillemaz AM, Baud RH, Scherrer JR (1990) Proximity processing of medical text. In medical
informatics Europe’90 (pp. 625–630). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
89. Morin E (1999) Automatic acquisition of semantic relations between terms from technical corpora. In proc.
of the fifth international congress on terminology and knowledge engineering-TKE’99
90. Müller M, Salathé M, Kummervold PE (2020) Covid-twitter-bert: A natural language processing model to
analyse covid-19 content on twitter. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.07503
91. "Natural Language Processing (2017) " Natural Language Processing RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 25
92. "Natural Language Processing" (2017) Natural Language Processing RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 23
93. Newatia R (2019) https://medium.com/saarthi-ai/sentence-classification-using-convolutional-neural-
networks-ddad72c7048c. Accessed 15 Dec 2021
94. Nhàn NT, Sager N, Lyman M, Tick LJ, Borst F, Su Y (1989) A medical language processor for two indo-
European languages. In proceedings. Symposium on computer applications in medical care (pp. 554-558).
Am Med Inform Assoc
95. Nießen S, Och FJ, Leusch G, Ney H (2000) An evaluation tool for machine translation: fast evaluation for
MT research. In LREC
96. Ochoa, A. (2016). Meet the Pilot: Smart Earpiece Language Translator. https://www.indiegogo.com/
projects/meet-the-pilot-smart-earpiece-language-translator-headphones-travel. Accessed April 10, 2017
97. Ogallo, W., & Kanter, A. S. (2017). Using natural language processing and network analysis to develop a
conceptual framework for medication therapy management research. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pubmed/28269895?dopt=Abstract. Accessed April 10, 2017
98. Otter DW, Medina JR, Kalita JK (2020) A survey of the usages of deep learning for natural language
processing. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems 32(2):604–624
99. Ouyang Y, Li W, Li S, Lu Q (2011) Applying regression models to query-focused multi-document
summarization. Inf Process Manag 47(2):227–237
100. Palmer M, Gildea D, Kingsbury P (2005) The proposition bank: an annotated corpus of semantic roles.
Computational linguistics 31(1):71–106

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3742 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

101. Papineni K, Roukos S, Ward T, Zhu WJ (2002) BLEU: a method for automatic evaluation of machine
translation. In proceedings of the 40th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics (pp.
311-318). Assoc Comput Linguist
102. Peng Y, Chi J (2019) Unsupervised cross-media retrieval using domain adaptation with scene graph. IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 30(11):4368–4379
103. Porter MF (1980) An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 14(3):130–137
104. Rae JW, Potapenko A, Jayakumar SM, Lillicrap TP, (2019) Compressive transformers for long-range
sequence modelling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.05507
105. Ranjan P, Basu HVSSA (2003) Part of speech tagging and local word grouping techniques for natural
language parsing in Hindi. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Natural Language
Processing (ICON 2003)
106. Rassinoux AM, Baud RH, Scherrer JR (1992) Conceptual graphs model extension for knowledge
representation of medical texts. MEDINFO 92:1368–1374
107. Rassinoux AM, Michel PA, Juge C, Baud R, Scherrer JR (1994) Natural language processing of medical
texts within the HELIOS environment. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 45:S79–S96
108. Rassinoux AM, Juge C, Michel PA, Baud RH, Lemaitre D, Jean FC, Scherrer JR (1995) Analysis of
medical jargon: The RECIT system. In Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe (pp.
42–52). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
109. Rennie J (2000) ifile: An application of machine learning to e-mail filtering. In Proc. KDD 2000 Workshop
on text mining, Boston, MA
110. Riedhammer K, Favre B, Hakkani-Tür D (2010) Long story short–global unsupervised models for
keyphrase based meeting summarization. Speech Comm 52(10):801–815
111. Ritter A, Clark S, Etzioni O (2011) Named entity recognition in tweets: an experimental study. In
proceedings of the conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (pp. 1524-1534).
Assoc Comput Linguist
112. Rospocher M, van Erp M, Vossen P, Fokkens A, Aldabe I, Rigau G, Soroa A, Ploeger T, Bogaard T(2016)
Building event-centric knowledge graphs from news. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the
World Wide Web, In Press
113. Sager N, Lyman M, Tick LJ, Borst F, Nhan NT, Revillard C, … Scherrer JR (1989) Adapting a medical
language processor from English to French. Medinfo 89:795–799
114. Sager N, Lyman M, Nhan NT, Tick LJ (1995) Medical language processing: applications to patient data
representation and automatic encoding. Methods Inf Med 34(1–2):140–146
115. Sahami M, Dumais S, Heckerman D, Horvitz E (1998) A Bayesian approach to filtering junk e-mail. In
learning for text categorization: papers from the 1998 workshop (Vol. 62, pp. 98-105)
116. Sakkis G, Androutsopoulos I, Paliouras G, Karkaletsis V, Spyropoulos CD, Stamatopoulos P (2001)
Stacking classifiers for anti-spam filtering of e-mail. arXiv preprint cs/0106040
117. Sakkis G, Androutsopoulos I, Paliouras G et al (2003) A memory-based approach to anti-spam filtering for
mailing lists. Inf Retr 6:49–73. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022948414856
118. Santoro A, Faulkner R, Raposo D, Rae J, Chrzanowski M, Weber T, ..., Lillicrap T (2018) Relational
recurrent neural networks. Adv Neural Inf Proces Syst, 31
119. Scherrer JR, Revillard C, Borst F, Berthoud M, Lovis C (1994) Medical office automation integrated into
the distributed architecture of a hospital information system. Methods Inf Med 33(2):174–179
120. Seal D, Roy UK, Basak R (2020) Sentence-level emotion detection from text based on semantic rules. In:
Tuba M, Akashe S, Joshi A (eds) Information and communication Technology for Sustainable
Development. Advances in intelligent Systems and computing, vol 933. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-981-13-7166-0_42
121. Sentiraama Corpus by Gangula Rama Rohit Reddy, Radhika Mamidi. Language Technologies Research
Centre, KCIS, IIIT Hyderabad (n.d.) ltrc.iiit.ac.in/showfile.php?filename=downloads/sentiraama/
122. Sha F, Pereira F (2003) Shallow parsing with conditional random fields. In proceedings of the 2003
conference of the north American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on human
language technology-volume 1 (pp. 134-141). Assoc Comput Linguist
123. Sharifirad S, Matwin S, (2019) When a tweet is actually sexist. A more comprehensive classification of
different online harassment categories and the challenges in NLP. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.10584
124. Sharma S, Srinivas PYKL, Balabantaray RC (2016) Emotion Detection using Online Machine Learning
Method and TLBO on Mixed Script. In Proceedings of Language Resources and Evaluation Conference
2016 (pp. 47–51)
125. Shemtov H (1997) Ambiguity management in natural language generation. Stanford University
126. Small SL, Cortell GW, Tanenhaus MK (1988) Lexical Ambiguity Resolutions. Morgan Kauffman, San
Mateo, CA

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744 3743

127. Socher R, Perelygin A, Wu J, Chuang J, Manning CD, Ng AY, Potts C (2013) Recursive deep models for
semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In proceedings of the 2013 conference on empirical
methods in natural language processing (pp. 1631-1642)
128. Sonnhammer EL, Eddy SR, Birney E, Bateman A, Durbin R (1998) Pfam: multiple sequence alignments
and HMM-profiles of protein domains. Nucleic Acids Res 26(1):320–322
129. Srihari S (2010) Machine Learning: Generative and Discriminative Models. http://www.cedar.buffalo.edu/
wsrihari/CSE574/Discriminative-Generative.pdf. accessed 31 May 2017.]
130. Sun X, Morency LP, Okanohara D, Tsujii JI (2008) Modeling latent-dynamic in shallow parsing: a latent
conditional model with improved inference. In proceedings of the 22nd international conference on
computational linguistics-volume 1 (pp. 841-848). Assoc Comput Linguist
131. Sundheim BM, Chinchor NA (1993) Survey of the message understanding conferences. In proceedings of
the workshop on human language technology (pp. 56-60). Assoc Comput Linguist
132. Sutskever I, Vinyals O, Le QV (2014) Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Advances
in Neural Information Processing Systems
133. Sworna ZT, Mousavi Z, Babar MA (2022) NLP methods in host-based intrusion detection Systems: A
systematic review and future directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.08066
134. Systems RAVN (2017) "RAVN Systems Launch the ACE Powered GDPR Robot - Artificial Intelligence
to Expedite GDPR Compliance." Stock Market. PR Newswire, n.d. Web. 19
135. Tan KL, Lee CP, Anbananthen KSM, Lim KM (2022) RoBERTa-LSTM: A hybrid model for sentiment
analysis with transformers and recurrent neural network. IEEE Access, RoBERTa-LSTM: A Hybrid Model
for Sentiment Analysis With Transformer and Recurrent Neural Network
136. Tapaswi N, Jain S (2012) Treebank based deep grammar acquisition and part-of-speech tagging for
Sanskrit sentences. In software engineering (CONSEG), 2012 CSI sixth international conference on (pp.
1-4). IEEE
137. Thomas C (2019) https://towardsdatascience.com/recurrent-neural-networks-and-natural-language-
processing-73af640c2aa1. Accessed 15 Dec 2021
138. Tillmann C, Vogel S, Ney H, Zubiaga A, Sawaf H (1997) Accelerated DP based search for statistical
translation. In Eurospeech
139. Umber A, Bajwa I (2011) “Minimizing ambiguity in natural language software requirements specification,
” in Sixth Int Conf Digit Inf Manag, pp. 102–107
140. "Using Natural Language Processing and Network Analysis to Develop a Conceptual Framework for
Medication Therapy Management Research (2017) " AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA
Symposium. U.S. National Library of Medicine, n.d. Web. 19
141. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I, (2017)
Attention is all you need. In advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 5998-6008)
142. Wahlster W, Kobsa A (1989) User models in dialog systems. In user models in dialog systems (pp. 4–34).
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, User Models in Dialog Systems
143. Walton D (1996) A pragmatic synthesis. In: fallacies arising from ambiguity. Applied logic series, vol 1.
Springer, Dordrecht)
144. Wan X (2008) Using only cross-document relationships for both generic and topic-focused multi-docu-
ment summarizations. Inf Retr 11(1):25–49
145. Wang W, Gang J, 2018 Application of convolutional neural network in natural language processing. In
2018 international conference on information Systems and computer aided education (ICISCAE) (pp. 64-
70). IEEE
146. Wang D, Zhu S, Li T, Gong Y (2009) Multi-document summarization using sentence-based topic models.
In proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP 2009 conference short papers (pp. 297-300). Assoc Comput Linguist
147. Wang D, Zhu S, Li T, Chi Y, Gong Y (2011) Integrating document clustering and multidocument
summarization. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD) 5(3):14–26
148. Wang Z, Ng P, Ma X, Nallapati R, Xiang B (2019) Multi-passage bert: A globally normalized bert model
for open-domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.08167
149. Wen Z, Peng Y (2020) Multi-level knowledge injecting for visual commonsense reasoning. IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 31(3):1042–1054
150. Wiese G, Weissenborn D, Neves M (2017) Neural domain adaptation for biomedical question answering.
arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03610
151. Wong A, Plasek JM, Montecalvo SP, Zhou L (2018) Natural language processing and its implications for
the future of medication safety: a narrative review of recent advances and challenges. Pharmacotherapy:
The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy 38(8):822–841
152. Woods WA (1978) Semantics and quantification in natural language question answering. Adv Comput 17:
1–87

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3744 Multimedia Tools and Applications (2023) 82:3713–3744

153. Xia T (2020) A constant time complexity spam detection algorithm for boosting throughput on rule-based
filtering Systems. IEEE Access 8:82653–82661. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2991328
154. Xie P, Xing E (2017) A constituent-centric neural architecture for reading comprehension. In proceedings
of the 55th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (volume 1: long papers) (pp.
1405-1414)
155. Yan X, Ye Y, Mao Y, Yu H (2019) Shared-private information bottleneck method for cross-modal
clustering. IEEE Access 7:36045–36056
156. Yi J, Nasukawa T, Bunescu R, Niblack W (2003) Sentiment analyzer: extracting sentiments about a given
topic using natural language processing techniques. In data mining, 2003. ICDM 2003. Third IEEE
international conference on (pp. 427-434). IEEE
157. Young SJ, Chase LL (1998) Speech recognition evaluation: a review of the US CSR and LVCSR
programmes. Comput Speech Lang 12(4):263–279
158. Yu S, et al. (2018) "A multi-stage memory augmented neural network for machine reading comprehen-
sion." Proceedings of the workshop on machine reading for question answering
159. Zajic DM, Dorr BJ, Lin J (2008) Single-document and multi-document summarization techniques for
email threads using sentence compression. Inf Process Manag 44(4):1600–1610
160. Zeroual I, Lakhouaja A, Belahbib R (2017) Towards a standard part of speech tagset for the Arabic
language. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci 29(2):171–178

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is
solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center
GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers
and authorised users (“Users”), for small-scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all
copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By accessing,
sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of
use (“Terms”). For these purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and
students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and
conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal subscription. These Terms will prevail over any
conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription (to
the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of
the Creative Commons license used will apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may
also use these personal data internally within ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share
it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not otherwise
disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies
unless we have your permission as detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial
use, it is important to note that Users may not:

1. use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale
basis or as a means to circumvent access control;
2. use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any
jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is otherwise unlawful;
3. falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association
unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in writing;
4. use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
5. override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
6. share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a
systematic database of Springer Nature journal content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a
product or service that creates revenue, royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as
part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal content cannot be
used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large
scale into their, or any other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not
obligated to publish any information or content on this website and may remove it or features or
functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature may revoke
this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content
which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or
guarantees to Users, either express or implied with respect to the Springer nature journal content and
all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law, including
merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published
by Springer Nature that may be licensed from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a
regular basis or in any other manner not expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer
Nature at

[email protected]