Multi-category hierarchical pointers network with lexical interaction for Chinese nested entity extraction


Abstract

Pointer networks are a common approach for addressing nested entity recognition. However, most existing studies employ linear labeling schemes for entity prediction, which fail to adequately represent multi-class entities and thus struggle to effectively handle overlapping structures. Moreover, these methods often overlook contextual lexical relationships, resulting in blurred entity boundaries. To address these limitations, this paper proposes a lexicon-enhanced pointer network. First, a multi-layer pointer mechanism is organized by entity categories, and a multi-label cross-entropy loss is introduced to optimize the labeling framework for better handling of overlapping entities. Subsequently, the LEBERT module is integrated into the BERT backbone to incorporate lexical information, thereby enhancing the modeling of word-pair relationships. Experimental results on three Chinese datasets—Resume, Weibo, and CMeEE-V2 show that the model achieves F1 scores of 97.23%, 72.73%, and 74.66%, respectively, demonstrating robust performance across both nested and non-nested entity recognition tasks. These findings validate that the proposed model improves feature integration, enhances entity recognition capability, and exhibits stronger scalability.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].