Inter national J our nal of Inf ormatics and Communication T echnology (IJ-ICT) V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 1 10 ISSN: 2252-8776, DOI: 10.11591/ijict.v14i1.pp1-10 1 A sur v ey on no v el appr oach to semantic computing f or domain specic multi-lingual man-machine interaction Anjali Bohra, Nemi Chand Barwar Department of Computer Sciences and Engineering, MBM Uni v ersity , Jodhpur , India Article Inf o Article history: Recei v ed Mar 5, 2024 Re vised Jul 24, 2024 Accepted Sep 21, 2024 K eyw ords: Deep learning Karaka relations Machine learning Natural language processing P anini grammar Semantic computing Semantic role labeling ABSTRA CT Natural language processing (NLP) helps computational linguists to understand, process, and e xtract information from natural languages. Linguist P anini signi- es ’information coding’ in a language and e xplains that Karakas are semantico- syntactic relations between nouns and v erbs that resemble participant roles of modern case grammar . Computational grammar maps vibhakti (inections) of nominals and v erbs to their participant roles. Karaka’ s theory e xtracts semantic roles in the sentences which act as intermediate steps for v arious NLP tasks. The surv e y sho ws that NLP seeks to bri dge the g ap for man-machine interaction. The w ork presents the impact of machine learning on natural language processing with changing trends from traditional to modern scenarios with P anini’ s classi- cation scheme for semantic computing f acilitating machine understanding. The study presents the signicance of Karaka for semantic computing, methodolo- gies for e xtracting semantic roles, and analysis of v arious deep learning-based language processing systems for applications lik e question answering. The sur - v e y co v ered around 50 research articles and 21 Karaka-based NLP systems per - forming multiple tasks lik e machine translation, question-a nswering systems, and te xt summaries using machine learning tools and frame w orks. The w ork includes surv e ys from reno wned journals, books, and rele v ant conferences, as well as descriptions of the latest trends and technologies in the machine learning domain. This is an open access article under the CC BY -SA license . Corresponding A uthor: Anjali Bohra Department of Computer Science and Engineering, MBM Uni v ersity Jodhpur , Rajasthan, India Email: anjali vb .phdcse@mbm.ac.in 1. INTR ODUCTION Articial intelligence (AI) inculcates human abilities into machines by allo wing learning through e x- perience and adjusting to ne w inputs. Examples include computers playing cards, and digital assistants lik e Siri [1]. Computers are trained using AI technologies including machine learning, natural language processing (NLP), and computer vision to accomplish specic tasks [2]. Machines are trained through machine learn- ing algorithms using data analysis and a v ailable patterns with minimal human interv entions. Computers can communicate with humans in their language, through reading, identifying and classifying te xt, hearing and interpreting speech, and measuring sentiments using NLP techniques. Computer vision trains computers to analyze and understand the visual w orld by accurately identifying, and classifying objects, recognizing f aces, processing li v e ac tions of a football g ame, and surpassing human visual abilities in man y areas. Free multi- lingual machine translators de v eloped by Google and Ale xa de v eloped by Amazon are prominent e xamples. AI J ournal homepage: http://ijict.iaescor e .com Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
2 ISSN: 2252-8776 technologies ha v e transformed communication technology by shifting the data-dri v en paradigm to intelligence- dri v en endea v ors. NLP helps machines to unders tand human language and beha v e as inte lligently as humans by amalg amation of linguistics and computer science disciplines [3]. NLP analyzes dif ferent aspects of language lik e syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and morphology to transform linguistic kno wledge into production-based algorithms for problem solution [4], [5]. T asks include translation, relationship e xtraction, speech recognition, named-entity recognition, topic se gmentation, sentiment analysis, Chatbots, and te xt Summarization. NLP tasks are performed in a sequence using a corpus and frame w ork. A frame w ork denes learning models us- ing components that automatically understand, code, compute gradients, and perform parallel processing for optimized performance [6]. Basic approaches to NLP are distrib utional-based, frame-based, model-theoretical-based, and interacti v e- based learning [7]. Distrib utional-based approaches use statistical concepts focused on mathematical analysis of the content, including tasks lik e part-of-speech tagging, dependenc y parsing, and semantic relationships. Frame-based approaches consider f rames as the standard for representing concepts . Model-theoretical-based approaches are semantic methods where the model denes the idea related to the concept and meaning of the sentence. Interacti v e learning approaches consider pragmatic concepts. T able 1 sho ws a list of designed lan- guage processing systems lik e sentiment analyzer , part of speech tagger , and emotion detection system through NLP methods and approaches. Understanding natural language has three stages of de v elopment: the rationalist stage, the empirical stage, and the deep learning stage. T able 1. Lang auge processing systems with NLP methods S No NLP systems NLP methods with approaches 1 Sentiment analyser [8] T opic as features (distrib utional approach) 2 P arts of speech taggers [9] Rule based methods (distrib utional approach) 3 Chunking [10], [11] Log-linear method/multi-label classication 4 Named entity recognition system [12], [13] Statistical methods (distrib utional approach) 5 Emotion detection system [14] Conditional random eld method (model-theoretical approach) 6 Semantic role labelling system [15] Semantic representation (frame-based-approach) 7 Ev ent disco v ery system [16] Latent semantic method (distrib utional approach) The rationalist stage focuses on implementing Chomsk y’ s rules for inducing reasoning and kno wl- edge into NLP systems lik e ELIZA, and MARGIE. The empirical stage focused on implementing generalized concepts in machines through pattern recognition and gener ati v e models lik e HMM and IBM translation mod- els. The curre nt deep learning stage focuses on implementing a layered model to perform end-to-end learning for feature e xtraction. Dense representations of w ords, sentences, paragraphs, and documents are learned to capture both syntactic and semantic features. The numbers in w ord v ector representation sho w the closeness of the encoded meaning with the specied concept [17]. NLP applications are hard and challenging as program- ming languages lik e Ja v a and Python are required for man-machine interaction. These programming languages are structured and unambiguous while human languages are ambiguous as well as re gion adapti v e [18]. The most dif cult part of training computers using programming languages is handling le xical, referential, and syntax-le v el ambiguity with synon yms and h ypern yms. Semantic computing concentrates on understanding the meaning, interpretation, and relationships be- tween w ords, phras es, and sentences through the grammar of a language to bridge the g ap between people and computers [19]. It composes information based on meaning and v ocab ulary by implementing computing technologies (lik e articial intelligence) through NLP , kno wledge engineering, softw are engineering, and com- puter netw orks to e xtract, transform, and synthesize the content [20]–[22]. The k e y components of semantic analysis are le xical semantics, syntax w ord embedding, and v ector space models. The study in v estig ates the ef fect of deep learning for NLP which has achie v ed ne w benchmarks through distrib uted representation and se- mantic generalization of w ords. Conte xtual w ord embeddings in dif ferent conte xts sho w dif ferent real-v alued v ector representations for the same w ord from a corpus [23], [24]. W ord embedding of te xtua l data is obtained using the embedding layer of K eras deep learning frame w ork, W ord2V ec or GloV e model, and bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BER T) language model [25], [26]. Pre-trained embeddings ha v e sho wn remarkable impro v ement in NLP tasks lik e speech recognition, syntactic parsing, te xt understanding and summarization, and question-answering systems [27]–[29]. Challenges in NLP: Despite major success in v arious NLP tasks lik e language modeling and machine Int J Inf & Commun T echnol, V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025: 1–10 Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
Int J Inf & Commun T echnol ISSN: 2252-8776 3 translation, deep l earning methods persist in lack of interpretability to interpret inter -sentential relations. More w ork is required in neural-symbolic representation of human kno wledge [30]. Decienc y of kno wledge, in- terpretability of models, and requirement of lar ge datasets are the major challenges for NLP through deep learning. Reinforcement learning with inference, and kno wledge-base lead to ne w learning paradigms [31]. Pragmatic interpretation is still an open area of research [32]. W ord sense disambiguation, structural ambigu- ity , and co-reference resolution are challenges due to ambiguity and polysemy . Idiomatic e xpress ions require conte xtual or cultural understanding. Lack of domain-speci c kno wledge misinterprets sentential relationships because dif ferent re gions include unique terms and jar gon that are unf amiliar to generalized language process- ing systems. Research g aps in this paper include: Challenge is to de v elop a uni v ersal approach, lar ge language model (LLM) based on Karak relations for mainstream Sanskrit, Hindi, and English language for NLP tasks lik e summarization, and translation. LLM suf fers from hallucination which can be resolv ed through e xact topic e xtraction techniques using semantic processing. The wide scope of research is open for multi-modal LLMs that combine te xt processing with audio, image, and video. W ork outline in this paper is brings together researchers fr om disciplines such as NLP , multi media semantics, semantic W eb, and pattern recognition to pro vide a single source for presenting the state of the technology to breakthroughs on the horizon. The introduction co v ers the history and de v elopment of machine learning’ s rele v ance to natural language processing with chal lenges to the eld. Section 2 co v ers the back- ground for NLP in semantic processing with the signicance of Karak theory . The ne xt section e xplains the methods follo wed with result s and discussion. The last section summarizes the w ork wit h guidelines for future directions. 2. B A CKGR OUND: COMPONENTS OF A LANGU A GE Linguistics considers language as a group of arbitrary v ocal signs, go v erned by innate and uni v ersal rules (grammar) of the language. Grammar has tw o types: descripti v e and Perspecti v e grammar . Descripti v e grammar denes a set of rules to formulate the speak er’ s grammar . Perspecti v e grammar focuses on correctness in the language. A grammatical cate gory is a class of units or features of a language indicating number , gender , de gree, person, case, deniteness or indeniteness, tense, aspect, mood, and agreement. Number is related to singular or plural concepts while gender is e xpres sed by v ariation in personal pronouns or third person. Examples of grammatical genders are he, she, it (singular), I, we, and you (rst a n d second form), and the y (third person plural either common/neuter gender). Case sho ws the relationship of the noun phrase with v erb and other noun phrases in a sentence lik e nominati v e case, geniti v e case, objecti v e case, etc, and de gree is sho wn by adjecti v es and adv erbs. T ense grammatical cate gory represents a time of an action and aspect denes a vie w of an e v ent which can be perspecti v e or imperati v e. Mood sho ws the speak er’ s attitude to w ards what he or she is talking about. Representing grammar (of a language) as mathematical e xpression is an intractable problem. Semantic netw orks, rst-order logic, frames, and production systems are used for kno wledge representation. Semantic netw orks describe the relation between an object and a class. Prolog programming language is based on a subset of rst-order l o gi c which is a declarati v e language for writing logic stat ements and proofs. The kno wledge is con v erted into modular chunks using a frame-base approach while rules specifying patterns and actions are specied through a production system-based approach. 2.1. Karak theory In linguistics, semantic analysis represents syntactic structures (w ords and phrases) with their language- independent meaning [33]. Linguist P anini dened a Karak-based approach for te xt and speech processing. He dened kno wledge representation methodologies in his book Asthadhayayi’ which are equi v alent to current AI systems including meta-rules for coding AI softw are [34]. He de v eloped a frame w ork for uni v ersal grammar that can be applied to an y natural language [35]–[37]. The frame w ork is based on the concept of karma and morphosyntactic structures to e xtract semantic roles in a sentence. A semantic role describes the relation of a syntactic constituent (noun phrase) with a predicate (the v erb or action) as an agent, patient, and instrument [38]. P aninian grammar processes sent ences at four le v els namely surf ace le v el (uttered sentence), bhakti le v el, Karaka le v el, and semantic le v el. Karakas specify relations between nominal and v erbal root [39]. F ollo wing A surve y on no vel appr oac h to semantic computing for domain specic . . . (Anjali Bohr a) Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
4 ISSN: 2252-8776 are the six Karakas specied by P anini according to their participation with the v erb in a sentence: i) Karta: describes action of v erb; ii) Karam: desired by the Karta Karak (subject); iii) Karana: act as instrum ent of the action performed by Karta; i v) Sampradaan: act as recipient of an action; v) Apaadaan: e xpress detachment or comparision from a source; and vi) Adhikarana: describe place of action. The Karaka-based approach is a template-based generation system which answer Karak-based ques- tions with rele v ance to the case of noun phrases in the sentence. A noun or pronoun e xists in eight forms in a sentence and therefore causes eight types of cases. Se v en forms of vibhakti are nominati v e, accusati v e, instrument, dati v e, locati v e, genti v e, and v ocati v e [40]. Karaka relations are semantic-syntactic relations where Karta Karak acts as a nominati v e case, Karam Karak as an objecti v e/accusati v e case, Karan Karak as an in- strument, Sampradaan as a dati v e case, Apadan as an Ablati v e case and Sambandh is geneti v e/possessi v e case. Adhikaran Karak act as a locati v e case and Sambodhan as a v ocati v e case [41]. Case is a property shared by all the languages of the w orld [42]. 2.2. Methods of semantic pr ocessing Semantic processing focuses on w ords to determine their signicance in a phrase or a sentence [43]. Similarity measures are used to nd the rele v anc y between the w ords [44]. Semantic processing methods decode the meaning within the te xt. The process starts with preprocessing and le xical analysis follo wed by parsing and syntactic analysis, semantic frame identication, and establishing mathematical representation of w ords through v ector space models/embedding l ayers. Based on the required application suitabl e semantic analysis method i s selected to e xtract the features. Finally , the system is e v aluated for impro ving the per - formance using techniques such as semantic feature analys is, latent semantic analysis, and semantic content analysis [45]. Semantic feature analysis emphasizes the representation of w ord features through feature selection (part of speech (POS) and morphological features), determining weights (through term frequenc y , in v erse-term frequenc y , normalized term frequenc y , and global term weighting), and similarity measurement(through cosine/Jaccard similarity and euclidean distance). Latent semantic analysis captures the relationship of w ords with their conte xt using statistical methods lik e reducing dimensionality and comparing semantic similarity . It is the mathematical method for e xtracting the meaning of w ords. The mathematics is to obtain parameters of an y X rectangular tXp matrix of (r rank) terms and passage through decomposition into three matrices using singular v alue decomposition using (1). X = T S P T (1) where T is txr matrix with orthonormal columns, P is pxr matrix with orthonormal columns and S is r x r diagonal matrix with sorted entries in descending order [46]. Semantic content analysis identies relationships between w ords and phrases using dependenc y parsing (graph-based parsing), thematic roles and case roles (re v eals relationships between actions, participants, and objects), and identication of semantic frame. 3. LITERA TURE REVIEW Anusaarka, a language translation system based on paninian theory uses an interlingua-based ap- proach which is an intermediate representation dened by v erb, noun, and Karaka relations [47]–[49]. A rule-based Hindi lemmatizer that generates the rules for e xtracting suf x es from the gi v en w ord [50], [51]. The go v ernment of India proposed a supervised learning-based Beng ali root w ord e xtraction system using P aninian grammatical rules under the TDIL project [52]. Opinion classication system for Odia language us- ing syntactic-semantic concept [53]. A list of dependenc y relations w as prepared based on P anini’ s grammar which sho ws that relations represent well-dened semantics for e xtraction from the surf ace form of the w ord without an y linguistic information [54]. Designed a paninian frame w ork-based case mark er error -resolv er for Indian languages [55]. A Marathi T reebank w as also designed based on Karak theory using Marathi corpus [56]. Natural language interf ace for dat abases w as designed to process user queries(including logical operators, relational operators, and joining of tables for the Hindi language) by con v erting them into equi v alent standard structured query language (SQL) query through computational P aninian grammatical frame w ork [57]. De- signed a constraint-based P arser for the Nepali language using Karak theory [58]. Int J Inf & Commun T echnol, V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025: 1–10 Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
Int J Inf & Commun T echnol ISSN: 2252-8776 5 T able 2 summarizes Karak-based language processing systems performing machine translation tas ks for Hindi, Sanskrit, and Malayalam languages, parsing of languages, and question-answering systems. The de- scription includes their functioning, used methodology , datasets or corpus as well as e v aluation results. These systems use denite w ords or sentences from specic corpus or datasets which are trained with features ob- tained from semantic processing. The systems are e v aluated using preci sion and recall F-measure. All systems attained almost 75 to 95 percent accurac y in results. T able 2. Karka-based language processing systems S No. System name Description Language Method Accurac y Corpus/Dataset 1 Anusaarka A language trans- lation system Kannada to Hindi, marathi, Beng ali, and T elugu Interlingua based method 92% approx. 30,000 w ords from Kannada dictionary and other language dictionaries 2 Hindi Lem- matizer [59] Extracts suf x es from the root w ord Hindi P aradigm based method 0.89 2,500 w ords for Hindi dictionary 3 Root w ord e xtraction system Extracts Beng ali root w ord Beng ali Rule based method 0.99 10,000 dif ferent in- ected w ords from Beng ali dictionary 4 Opinion classication system [60] Classies opinion of re vie wers Beng ali T opic based ap- proach 0.7 Beng ali ne wspa- per a v ailable at http://www .ananda bazar .com/ 5 Dependenc y- relations identication system [61] lists dependenc y relations Sanskrit Production-based system 0.9 Bhagv at-Gita 6 Case- mark er - errors iden- tication system [62] Identies case mark er errors for Indian languages committed by google machine translators English to Urdu translation Karak-vibhakti based dependenc y frame w ork Machine trans- lation neural based 32% ac- curate and 21% phrase-based 500 English sen- tences 7 Sanskrit Karak ana- lyzer [13] T ak es unicode De vnagri te xt and returns Karak analyzed te xt Sanskrit Rule based ap- proach 84% accurate 31 Karaka, 72 vib- hakti from sanskrit dictionary 8 Pilagiarism detection system [63] Plagiarism detec- tion system based on paninian frame w ork Malayalam Machine learning approach Online Malayalam ne wspapers 9 V erbframator [64] Extracts v erb frames for the gi v en sentences Marathi Karaka based ma- chine learning Generate v erb frames b ut require some human inter - v ention 40,000 Marathi v erbs from W ord- Net (subset of Indo-W ordNet) 10 Question- answering system [65] Generates ques- tions in Hindi language Hindi Karak-based ma- chine learning 5 pt Lik ert scale: 3.019, 3,336 syntactic and semantic mean 30 sentences from Hindi corpus 11 Question an- swering sys- tem [66] Generate answers by comparing vibhakthi and POS tags of question w ords Malayalam V ibhathi and POS tagging based ap- proach Generate w ord le v el answers Malayalam corpus 12 Semantic tagger and Karaka ana- lyzer [51] Perform tagging and identify Karaka Hindi rule-based ap- proach 84% precise Hindi corpus A surve y on no vel appr oac h to semantic computing for domain specic . . . (Anjali Bohr a) Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
6 ISSN: 2252-8776 T able 2. Karka-based language processing systems (Continued) S No. System name Description Language Method Accurac y Corpus/Dataset 13 T e xt Cluster - ing for a doc- ument [67] Generate mean- ingful labels of the clusters Punjabi Karaka based ma- chine learning ap- proach 95% precise Punjabi corpus 14 Generate se- mantic roles [68], [69] Generic labels for the tok ens of te xt Malayalam Karaka based ma- chine learning ap- proach Malayalam corpus 15 Karakacross: sentiment analysis [70] Extract senti- ments related semantic roles Dif ferent lan- guages Sentiment e xtrac- tion using Karaka theory Multi-lingual datasets 16 T e xt summa- rization sys- tem [71] Perform single- document sum- marization Malayalam SRL based on Karaka theory 80 % precise Online Malayalam repository 17 Cross- lingual study based on Karaka [72] Impact of Karakas on congition Sanskrit, Marathi, Kanada, and T elugu Karaka based ma- chine learning sys- tem Karta and Karma mapped accurately Sanskrit and Marathi language corpus 18 Case ana- lyzer system [73] Extract cases of Eastern Indo- Aryan languages 7 Indo-Aryan lan- guages T radition and modern approach to study cogniti v e frame w ork 80% accurate language- specic case relations Corpus of Indo- Aryan languages 19 Question an- swering sys- tem [74] Extraction of similarity features for classication in question answer (QA) selection Hindi Karaka based ma- chine learning ap- proach Proper e x- traction of Karaka reduce needs role of pre-trained Hindi corpus 20 T e xt summa- rization sys- tem [75] Extracti v e sum- marization of a document Malayalam Machine learning based on Karaka theory 66% precise and 65% ef - cient in recall Malayalam corpus 21 Question an- swering sys- tem [76] Retrie v al of an- swers for ques- tion answering Hindi and Marathi QA based on Karaka theory for Indic languages 80%, 60% pre- cise for Hindi and marathi language Hindi and Marathi corpus 4. METHOD This re vie w research on Karak-based multi-lingual language processing systems is rele v ant to answer questions related to the semantic interpretation of a language. Systemat ic literature re vie w (SLR) has three parts: planning, construction, and reporting phase. The planning phase focuses on the need for a re vie w accompanied by research questions. The construction phase selects primary studies and e xtracts data from those studies and the nal stage disseminates results. The w ork e xplains the ef fecti v eness of NLP in semantics to f acilitate high-le v el programming languages (Prolog and Python) for computers. 5. RESUL TS AND DISCUSSION 5.1. Results: Karak-based semantic rules in moder n generati v e grammar Karaka’ s theory is syntact ic to the semantic formalization of language aspects. Case grammar de- scribed by l lmore re generated the P aninian proposal in a modern linguistic conte xt. He h ypothesized human equi v alent uni v ersal concepts for making judgments about the e v ents or actions using the follo wing answers to raised 5W (who/what/when/where/wh y) based questions [77], [78]. Who is the initiator of the action?: Agent What is in v olv ed in the action?: Instrument (in v olv ed object) Who emphasis on the ef fect of the action?: Dati v e What is the result of the action?: F actiti v e (object) When and Where the e v ent (or action) is oriented?: Locati v e Wh y the things are af fected by the action?: Objecti v e P aninian-based Karak species answers to the questions for semantic interpretation of an y natural Int J Inf & Commun T echnol, V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025: 1–10 Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
Int J Inf & Commun T echnol ISSN: 2252-8776 7 language. Le xical, morphological, and syntactic features describe an y language [79]. Le xico-syntactic fea- tures include POS tagging, morphological tagging includes root w ord, gender , number , person, and case, and syntactic features include head noun, chunk label, and dependenc y relation. Semantic role labeling is a se- mantic parsing technique widely used in question-answering systems or information e xtraction systems that assign semantic roles to syntactic constituents (ar guments of predicate in a sentence). Karakas e xplained pars- ing Indian languages and creating T reebank for Hindi [80]. The T reebank dataset contains around four mil- lion annotated w ords di vided into dif ferent annotations lik e parts-of-speech, syntactic, and semanti c sk eletons [81]. Sanchay is a free linguistic annotation tool for Indian languages published in a list of programs as part of education. Dependenc y-based formalis m is incorporated for morphologically rich languages ef forts ha v e been incorporated for dependenc y-based formalism [82], [83]. Hyderabad dependenc y treebank (HyDT) for Hindi uses Karak relations to capture local semantics and labels rele v ant to the v erb through dependenc y-based approach [84], [85]. 5.2. Discussion: method of inf ormation coding in a language Language has grammar (rules) for combining the w ords [86]. Languages use parsing to code the information. Semantic analysis helps in encoding the relations in a sentence. Grammar decides ho w the relations are coded in the language. Information can be summarized by answering 5W questions lik e who, what, when, where, and wh y . In machine translation, a gi v en source is translated into the tar get language through 5Ws comprehensi v e [87]. Answering 5Ws generates domain-independent generic semantic roles. P aninian grammar signies the minute obse rv ations re g arding i nformation coding in a language. P anini signies information coding’ in a language by answering three questions: where, which and ho w . Three aspects of questioning for e xtracting information coding in a language are: Where the information is coded? Which relations are coded in the sentence? And Ho w the relations are coded? A w ord can be tagged as nominal/v erbal form according to the grammar . T ense and person morpho- logically inect the w ord in a sentence. Each sentence is represented using alphabet letters and one sentence can be dened in terms of another e xactly lik e the production rules of a Chomsk y gram mar [88]. Surf ace le v el (uttered sentence), vibhakti le v el, Karaka le v el, and semantic le v el are the four le v els of te xt processing using the P aninian frame w ork. 6. CONCLUSION The paper presents a surv e y on paninia n frame w ork-based (Karak theory-based) language proce ss- ing systems. It deals with a syntactico-semantic aspect of linguistics and the de v elopment stages of machine learning for NLP . The study suggests that syntactic-se mantic concepts (semantic role labeling) ha v e been le v er - aged through recent trends in machine learning algorithms and may benet as a ne w paradigm of language- independent processing. The study e xplored a comprehens i v e w ork on the P aninian aspect of language pro- cessing with the latest trends in deep learni ng. Ho we v er , in-depth studies are needed to get linguistic insights especially to understand speak er and listener communication. Researchers who w ant to utilize NLP for v arious purposes in their eld can understand the o v erall technical status and the main technologies of NLP through this paper . Our study demonstrates t hat Karaka theory retains linguistic insights, which are more resilient than other semantic methods. The in v estig ation opens a wide scope of research to unfold deeper linguistic aspects with feasible w ays of unfolding cognition of Karaka in real-life man-machine interaction. REFERENCES [1] N. Sri v asta v a, G. Hinton, A. Krizhe vsk y , I. Sutsk e v er , and R. Salakhutdino v , “Dropout: a simple w ay to pre v ent neural netw orks from o v ertting, J ournal of Mac hine Learning Resear c h , v ol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1929–1958, 2014. [2] “SAS data and AI solutions, F ive AI tec hnolo gies . [Online]. A v ailable: https://www .sas.com/en in/insights/articles/analytics/ v e- ai-technologies.html. [3] V . N. Gudi v ada and K. Arbabif ard, “Open-source libraries, application frame w orks, and w orko w systems for NLP , in Compu- tational Analysis and Under standing of Natur al Langua g es : Principles, Methods and Applications , Series Handbook of Statistics, Else vier , 2018, pp. 31–50. [4] “Natural language processing: What it is? and ho w does it w ork?” [Online]. A v ailable: https://monk e ylearn.com/natural-language- processing. [5] M. Raza, “Importance of NLP in data science, Medium, 2021. [Online]. A v ailable: https://medium.com/theleanprogrammer/importance-of-nlp-in-data-science-3e2fd2424b2d. A surve y on no vel appr oac h to semantic computing for domain specic . . . (Anjali Bohr a) Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
8 ISSN: 2252-8776 [6] A. Shatna wi, G. Al -Bdour , R. Al-Qurran, and M. Al-A yyoub, A comparati v e study of open source deep learning frame w orks, in 2018 9th International Confer ence on Information and Communication Systems, ICICS 2018 , 2018, v ol. 2018-January , pp. 72–77, doi: 10.1109/IA CS.2018.8355444. [7] M . Y ao, “F our approaches to natural language processing and understanding, T opBots , 2017. [Online]. A v ailable: https://www .topbots.com/4-dif ferent-approaches-natural-language-processing-understanding. [8] J . Y i, T . Nasuka w a, R. Bunescu, and W . Niblack, “Sentiment analyzer: e xtracting sentiments about a gi v en topic using natural language processing techniques, in Pr oceedings - IEEE International Confer ence on Data Mining , ICDM , 2003, pp. 427–434, doi: 10.1109/icdm.2003.1250948. [9] N. T apaswi and S. Jain, “T reebank based deep grammar acquisition and part-of-speech tagging for Sanskrit sentences, in 2012 CSI 6th International Confer ence on Softwar e Engineering , CONSEG 2012 , 2012, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1109/CONSEG.2012.6349476. [10] F . Sha and F . Pereira, “Shallo w parsing with conditional random elds, in Pr oceedings of the 2003 Human Langua g e T ec hnolo gy Confer ence of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, HL T -N AA CL 2003 , 2003, pp. 213–220, doi: 10.3115/1073445.1073473. [11] R. McDonald, K. Crammer , and F . Pereira, “Fle xible te xt se gmentation with structured multilabel classication, in HL T/EMNLP 2005 - Human Langua g e T ec hnolo gy Confer ence and Confer ence on Empirical Methods in Natur al Langua g e Pr ocessing , Pr oceed- ings of the Confer ence , 2005, pp. 987–994, doi: 10.3115/1220575.1220699. [12] A. Ritter , C. Sam, Mausam, and O. Etzioni, “Named entity recognition in tweets: an e xperimental study , in EMNLP 2011 - Confer ence on Empirical Methods in Natur al Langua g e Pr ocessing , Pr oceedings of the Confer ence , 2011, pp. 1524–1534. [13] S. K. Mishra and G. N. Jha, “Sanskrit K ¯ araka analyzer for machine translation, in SPLASH pr oceeding of iSTRANS , 2007, pp. 224–225. [14] A. Ilyas, K. Shahzad, and M. Kamran Malik, “Emotion detection in code-mix ed Roman Urdu-English te xt, A CM T r ansactions on Asian and Low-Resour ce Langua g e Information Pr ocessing , v ol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1–28, 2023. [15] P . Martha, “The proposition bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles, Computational Linguistics , v ol. 31, no. 1, pp. 71–105, 2005. [16] E. Benson, A. Haghighi, and R. Barzilay , “Ev ent disco v ery in social media feeds, in A CL-HL T 2011 - Pr oceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Langua g e T ec hnolo gies , 2011, v ol. 1, pp. 389–398. [17] A. Bohra and N. C. Barw ar , “Performance e v aluation of w ord representation techniques using deep learning methods, in Pr o- ceedings of the 2020 International Confer ence on Computing , Communic ation and Security , ICCCS 2020 , 2020, pp. 1–7, doi: 10.1109/ICCCS49678.2020.9277190. [18] A. Bharati, R. Sang al, and V . Chaitan ya, “Natural language processing, comple xity theory and logic, in F oundations of Softwar e T ec hnolo gy and Theor etical Computer Science: T enth Confer ence , Bangalor e , India December 17–19, 1990 Pr oceedings 10 , 1990, v ol. 472 LNCS, pp. 410–420, doi: 10.1007/3-540-53487-3 60. [19] L. W ang, H. W ang, and S. Y u, “Semantic computing and language kno wledge bases, in IOP Confer ence Series: Materials Science and Engineering , 2017, v ol. 242, no. 1, p. 12109, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/242/1/012109. [20] P . Sheu, “Semantic computing and cogniti v e computing/informatics, in 2017 IEEE 16th International Confer ence on Co gnitive Informatics & Co gnitive Computing (ICCI* CC) , 2017, pp. 4–4, doi: 10.1109/icci-cc.2017.8109801. [21] P . C .-Y . S heu, Semantic computing . H. Y u, C. V . Ramamoorth y , A. K. Joshi, L. A. Zadeh, Ed., W ile y Online Library , 2010. [22] S.-U. P ark, Analysis of the status of natural language processing technology based on deep learning, The J ournal of Bigdata , v ol. 6, no. 1, pp. 63–81, 2021. [23] S. T ekir and Y . Bastanlar , “Deep le arning: e x emplar studies in natural language processing and computer vision, Data Mining - Methods, Applications and Systems , p. 1, 2020, doi: 10.5772/intechopen.91813. [24] J . Bro wniee, “Deep learning for natural language processing, in Mac hine Learning Mystery , 2017. [25] N. Ag arw al, “The ultimate guide to dif ferent w ord embedding techniques in NLP , KDnug g ets , 2022. https://www .kdnuggets.com/2021/11/guide-w ord-embedding-techniques-nlp.html. [26] D . Suhartono, A. P . Gema, S. W inton, T . Da vid, M. I. F anan y , and A. M. Arymurth y , Ar gument annotation and analysis using deep learning with attention mechanism in Bahasa Indonesia, J ournal of Big Data , v ol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40537- 020-00364-z. [27] T . Katte, “Recurrent neural netw ork and its v arious architecture types, International J ournal of Resear c h and Scientic Inno vation (IJRSI) , v ol. 5, no. 3, pp. 124–129, 2018. [28] R. Salakhutdino v and G. Hinton, “Deep Boltzmann machines, in Pr oceedings of the T welfth International Confer ence on Articial Intellig ence and Statistics , 2009, v ol. 5, pp. 448–455. [29] N. Sethi, A. De v , and P . Bansal, A no v el neural machine translation approach for lo w-resource Sanskrit-Hindi language pair , A CM T r ansactions on Asian and Low-Resour ce Langua g e Information Pr ocessing , Apr . 2023, doi: 10.1145/3591207. [30] L. Ferrone and F . M. Zanzotto, “Symbolic, distrib uted, and distrib utional representations for natural language processing in the era of deep learning: a surv e y , F r ontier s in Robotics and AI , v ol. 6, p. 153, 2020, doi: 10.3389/frobt.2019.00153. [31] H. Li, “Deep learning for natural language processing: adv antages and challenges, National Science Re vie w , v ol. 5, no. 1, pp. 24–26, 2018, doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwx110. [32] A. Bharati, V . Chaitan ya, R. Sang al, and B. Gillon, Natur al langua g e pr ocessing: A P aninian per spective . Prentice Hal l India Learning Pri v ate Limited, 1995. [33] S. Selot, N. T ripathi, and A. S. Zadg aonkar , “Neural netw ork model for semantic analysis of Sanskrit te xt, International J ournal of Natur al Computing Resear c h , v ol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2018, doi: 10.4018/ijncr .2018010101. [34] S. D. Joshi, “Syntactic and semantic de vices in the Ast ¯ adh y ¯ ay ¯ ı of P ¯ an . ini, J ournal of Indian Philosophy , v ol. 29, no. 1–2, pp. 155–167, 2001, doi: 10.1023/a:1017559527007. [35] S. C. Kak, “The P aninian approach to natural language processing, International J ournal of Appr oximate Reas oning , v ol. 1, no. 1, pp. 117–130, 1987, doi: 10.1016/0888-613X(87)90007-7. [36] P . R. Chaudhari, P . C. Gangurde, and N. L. K ulkarni, “Study of methodologies for util izing Sanskrit in computational linguistics, International J ournal of Electr onics, Communication and Soft Computing Science & Engineering , p. 1, 2015. Int J Inf & Commun T echnol, V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025: 1–10 Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
Int J Inf & Commun T echnol ISSN: 2252-8776 9 [37] D. Jha, R. Jha, and V . V arshne y , “Na tural language processing and Sanskrit, International J ournal of Computer Engineering & T ec hnolo gy , v ol. 5, no. 10, pp. 57–63, 2014. [38] Amita and A. Jangra, An annotation scheme for English language using P ani nian frame w ork, IJISET - International J ournal of Inno vative Science , Engineering & T ec hnolo gy , v ol. 2, no. 1, pp. 616–619, 2015. [39] A. Bharati and R. Sang al, “Computational P aninian grammar frame w ork, in Superta g ging: Using comple x le xical descriptions in natur al langua g e pr ocessing , 2010, pp. 355–370. [40] S. Chatterji, T . M. Sarkar , S. Sarkar , and J. Chakraborty , “Karak relations in Beng ali, in Pr oceedings of 31st All-India Confer ence of Linguists (AICL 2009) , 2009, pp. 33–36. [41] B. V . S. Perraju, Algorithmic aspects of natural language parsing using P aninian frame w ork, M. T ech thesis, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, IIT Kanpur , 1992. [42] K. Alla, R. Prasad, and R. R. Kandula, A ne w approach to Hindi te xt ste g anograph y using Hindi Karak Kriyaye, J ournal of Information Assur ance & Security , v ol. 6, no. 6, 2011. [43] A. Bada wi, “The ef fecti v eness of natural language processing (NLP) as a processing solut ion and semantic impro v ement, Interna- tional J ournal of Economic, T ec hnolo gy and Social Sciences , v ol. 2, no. 1, pp. 36–44, 2021, doi: 10.53695/injects.v2i1.194. [44] S. Li, J. Zhang, X. Huang, S. Bai, and Q. Liu, “Semantic computation in a Chinese question-answering system, J ournal of Computer Science and T ec hnolo gy , v ol. 17, no. 6, pp. 933–939, 2002, doi: 10.1007/BF02960786. [45] S. A. Salloum, R. Khan, and K. Shaalan, A surv e y of semantic analysis approaches, in Pr oceedings of the International Confer ence on Articial Intellig ence and Computer V ision (AICV2020) , 2020, v ol. 1153 AISC, pp. 61–70, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-44289-7 6. [46] T . Landauer and S. Dumais, “Latent semantic analysis, Sc holarpedia , v ol. 3, no. 11, p. 4356, 2008, doi: 10.4249/scholarpedia.4356. A v ailable: http://www .scholarpedia.or g/article/Latentsemanticanalysis?ref=https://githubhelp.com [47] A. Bharati, M. Bhatia, V . Chaitan ya, and R. Sang al, “P aninian grammar frame w ork applied to English, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of T echnology , Kanpur , 1996. [48] S. Mittal, A re vie w of Engli sh to Indian language translator: Anusaaraka, IJCA Pr oceedings on International Confer ence on Advances in Computer Engineering and Applications , v ol. ICA CEA, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2014. [49] A. P . K ulkarni, “Design and architecture of Anusaaraka’-An approach to machine translation, Satyam T ec hnical Re vie w , v ol. 3, pp. 57–64, 2003. [50] S. P aul, M. T andon, N. Joshi, and I. Mathur , “Design of a rule based Hindi lemmatizer , in Pr oceedings of Thir d Interna- tional W orkshop on Articial Intellig ence , Soft Computing and Appli cations, Chennai, India , 2013, v ol. 2, pp. 67–74, doi: 10.5121/csit.2013.3408. [51] P . Katyayan and N. Jos hi, “De v elopment of automatic rule-based semantic tagger and Karaka analyzer for Hindi, T r ansactions on Asian and Low-Resour ce Langua g e Information Pr ocessing , v ol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1–25, 2021, doi: 10.1145/3479155. [52] A. Das, T . Halder , and D. Saha, Automatic e xtraction of Beng ali root v erbs using P aninian grammar , in RTEICT 2017 - 2nd IEEE International Confer ence on Recent T r ends in Electr onics, Information and Communication T ec hnolo gy , Pr oceedings , 2017, v ol. 2018-January , pp. 953–956, doi: 10.1109/R TEICT .2017.8256739. [53] B. K. Mishra and R. Sahoo, A h ybrid kno wledge mining approach to de v elop a system frame w ork for Odia language te xt process- ing, Materials T oday: Pr oceedings , v ol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1335–1340, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.matpr .2017.11.219. [54] J. Bronkhors t, “The role of meanings in P anini’ s grammar , Indian Linguistics , v ol. 40, pp. 146–157, 1979. [55] S. Bhate and S. Kak, “P ¯ an . ini’ s grammar and computer science, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Resear c h Institute , v ol. 72, no. 1/4, pp. 79–94, 1991. [56] P . Lahoti, N. Mittal, and G. Singh, A surv e y on NLP resources, tools, and techniques for Marat hi language processing, A CM T r ansactions on Asian and Low-Resour ce Langua g e Information Pr ocessing , v ol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1–34, 2022, doi: 10.1145/3548457. [57] A. Kataria and R. Nath, “Natural language interf ace for databases in Hindi based on Karaka theory , International J ournal of Computer Applications , v ol. 122, no. 7, pp. 39–43, 2015, doi: 10.5120/21716-4841. [58] A. Y ajnik and D. Sharma, “P arsi ng techniques using P aninian frame w ork on Nepali language, DJ J ournal of Engineering and Applied Mathematics , v ol. 1, no. 1, pp. 23–28, 2015, doi: 10.18831/djmaths.or g/2015011004. [59] N. Kanuparthi, A. Inumella, and D. M. Sharma, “Hindi deri v ational morphological analyzer , in Pr oceedings of the T welfth Meeting of the Special Inter est Gr oup on Computational Morpholo gy and Phonolo gy , pp. 10–16, 2012. [60] A. Das, “Opinion e xtraction and summarization from te xt documents in Beng ali, Department of Compute r Science & Engineering, Jada vpur Uni v ersity , 2011. [61] V . N. Mi sra, The descriptive tec hnique of P an . ini: an intr oduction , v ol. 18. W alter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2017. [62] S. Muzaf f ar , P . Behera, and G. N. Jha, A P ¯ anini ¯ an frame w ork for analyzing case mark er errors in English-Urdu machine translation, Pr ocedia Computer Science , v ol. 96, pp. 502–510, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.08.117. S. K. Mishra and G. N. Jha, “Sanskrit K ¯ araka analyzer for machine translation, in SPLASH pr oce eding of iSTRANS , 2007, pp. 224–225. [63] L. Sindhu, An inte grated approach for plagiarism detection in Malayalam documents, Cochin Uni v ersity of Science and T echnol- ogy , 2017. [64] H. Redkar et al. , “V erbframator: Semi-automatic v erb frame annotator tool with special reference to Marathi, in Pr oceedings of the 13th International Confer ence on Natur al Langua g e Pr ocessing , 2016, pp. 299–304. [65] K. Anuranjana, V . A. Rao, and R. Mamidi, “Hindi question gene ration using dependenc y structures, arXi v preprint arXi v:1906.08570, 2019, [Online]. A v ailable: http://arxi v .or g/abs/1906.08570. [66] S. M. Archana, N. V ahab, R. Thankappan, and C. Raseek, A rule based quest ion answering system in Malayalam corpus using V ibhakthi and POS tag analysis, Pr ocedia T ec hnolo gy , v ol. 24, pp. 1534–1541, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.protc y .2016.05.124. P . Katyayan and N. Joshi, “De v elopment of automatic rule-based semantic tagger and Karaka analyzer for Hindi, T r ansactions on Asian and Low-Resour ce Langua g e Information Pr ocessing , v ol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1–25, 2021, doi: 10.1145/3479155. [67] S. Sharma and V . Gupta, “Punjabi documents clustering system, J ournal of Emer ging T ec hnolo gie s in W eb Intellig ence , v ol. 5, no. 2, pp. 171–187, 2013, doi: 10.4304/jetwi.5.2.171-187. [68] J. P . Jayan, J. S. K umar , and T . Amudha, “Semantic role identication for Malayalam using machi ne learning approaches, Inno va- tions in Systems and Softwar e Engineering , pp. 1–7, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11334-022-00496-w . A surve y on no vel appr oac h to semantic computing for domain specic . . . (Anjali Bohr a) Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
10 ISSN: 2252-8776 [69] K. T . Radhika and P . C. R. Raj, “Semantic role e xtraction and general concept understanding in Malayalam using P aninian grammar , International J ournal of Engineering Resear c h and De velopment , v ol. 9, no. 3, pp. 28–33, 2013. [70] D. Rai, “KarakA CR OSS: a Karaka-based approach to cross-lingual sentiment analysis, International J ournal of Liter atur e and Langua g es , v ol. 3, no. 09, pp. 1–4, 2023, doi: 10.37547/ijll/V olume03Issue09-01 01-04 0. [71] M . Rahul Raj, R. P . Haroon, and N. V . Sobhana, A no v el e xtracti v e te xt summarization system with self-or g anizing map clustering and entity recognition, Sadhana - Academy Pr oceedings in Engineering Sciences , v ol. 45, no. 1, p. 32, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s12046- 019-1248-0. [72] J . A. Gajjam, “T aking a road not tra v elled: A cross-lingual study of K ¯ araka-cognition, Langua g e in India , v ol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1–24, 2021. [73] B . Lahiri, The case system of Eastern Indo-Aryan langua g es: a typolo gical o vervie w . Routledge India, 2021. [74] D. A. V erma, R. S. Joshi, S. A. Joshi, and O. K. Susladkar , “Study of similarity measures as features in classication for answer sentence selection task in Hindi question answering: language-specic vs other measures, in Pr oceedings of the 35th P acic Asia Confer ence on Langua g e , Information and Computation, P A CLIC 2021 , 2021, pp. 715–724. [75] J . P . Jayan and V . Go vindaru, Automatic summarization of Malayalam documents using te xt e xtraction methods, in SCRS Confer - ence Pr oceedings on Intellig ent Systems , 2021, pp. 443–457, doi: 10.52458/978-93-91842-08-6-42. [76] D. V erma, R. Joshi, A. Shi v ani, and R. Gupta, “Karaka-based answer retrie v al for question answering in Indic languages, in International Confer ence Recent Advances in Natur al Langua g e Pr ocessing , RANLP , 2023, pp. 1216–1224, doi: 10.26615/978- 954-452-092-2 129. [77] A. V aidya, S. Husain, P . Mannem, and D. M. Sharma, A Karaka based annotation scheme for English, in Computational Li nguistics and Intellig ent T e xt Pr ocessing: 10th International Confer ence , CICLing 2009, Me xico City , Me xico, Mar c h 1-7, 2009. Pr oceedings 10 , 2009, v ol. 5449 LNCS, pp. 41–52, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-00382-0 4. [78] A. Bharati and R. Sang al, “P arsing free w ord order languages in the P aninian frame w ork, in 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 1993, v ol. 1993-June, pp. 105–111, doi: 10.3115/981574.981589. [79] R. Briggs, “Kno wledge representation in Sanskrit and articial intelligence, AI Ma gazine , v ol. 6, no. 1, p. 32, 1985, [Onl ine]. A v ailable: http://www .aaai.or g/ojs/inde x.php/aimag azine/article/vie w/466/402. [80] S. Singh and T . J. Siddiqui, “Role of Karaka relations in Hindi w ord sense disambiguation, J ournal of Information T ec hnolo gy Resear c h (JITR) , v ol. 8, no. 3, pp. 21–42, 2015, doi: 10.4018/JITR.2015070102. [81] R . Zhao, R. Y an, Z. Chen, K. Mao, P . W ang, and R. X. Gao, “Deep learning and its applications to machine health monitoring, Mec hanical Systems and Signal Pr ocessing , v ol. 115, pp. 213–237, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.05.050. [82] S . K. Karn, “Case system in Maithili: from semantic perspecti v e, Nepalese Linguistics , v ol. 23, p. 126, 2008. [83] Natural language processing tutorial, tutorialspoint, [Online]. A v ailable: https://www .tutorialspoint.com/natural language processing/inde x.htm. [84] O. Rambo w , B. Dorr , K. Kipper , I. K u ˇ cero v ´ a, and M. P almer , Automa tically deri ving tectogrammatical labels from other resources: a comparison of semantic labels across frame w orks, Pr a gue Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics , v ol. 79–80, pp. 23–35, 2003. [85] P . J. Anton y and K. P . Soman, “Computational morphology and natural language parsing for Indian languages: a literature surv e y , International J ournal of Scientic & Engineering Resear c h , v ol. 3, no. 3, pp. 136–146, 2012. [86] A . Bharati and A. K ulkarni, “Information coding in a language: some insights from P aninian grammar , 2008. [87] K . P arton et al. , “Who, what , when, where, wh y? Comparing multiple approaches to the cross-lingual 5W task, in A CL-IJCNLP 2009 - J oint Confer ence of the 47th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 4th International J oint Confer ence on Natur al Langua g e Pr ocessing of the AFNLP , Pr oceedings of the Confer ence , 2009, pp. 423–431. [88] A. Bharati and R. Sang al, A Karaka based approach to parsing of Indian languages, in COLING 1990 V olume 3: P aper s pr esented to the 13th International Confer ence on Computational Linguistics , 1990, pp. 25–29, doi: 10.3115/991146.991151. BIOGRAPHIES OF A UTHORS Anjali Bohra recei v ed her rst de gree Bachelor of Engineering in Computer Science and Engineering from Mody Colle ge of Engineering and T echnology , Rajasthan Uni v ersity , Laxmang arh, Rajasthan 2002. She has also attained Master de gree in Computer Science and Engineering from MBM Engineering Colle ge, Jai Narain Vyas Uni v ersity , Jodhpur , Rajasthan i n 2012. Currently a Ph.D. scholar and her research interests focus on natural language processing, articial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning. She can be contacted at email: anjali vb .phdcse@mbm.ac.in. Nemi Chand Barwar has B.E. in Computer T echnology from MANIT Bhopal, M.E. in Digital Communication, and a Ph.D. from MBM Engineering Colle ge, Jodhpur . He w orks as a Professor at, the Department of Computer Science & Engineering, MBM Uni v ersity , Jodhpur . He has e xperience of o v er 30 years in the eld of teaching and research. He has published more than 60 research papers in national and international conferences a nd journals. He is supervising the Ph.D. research program in computer science and engine ering discipline as well as in Information. His research and teaching interests are computer netw orking, WSN, MANET/V ANET , IoT , big data analytics, V oD, P2P netw orks , and machine learning. He had or g a nized 10 national conferences and short-term courses sponsored by AICTE/UGC/DST . He is a l ife member of ISTE, IEI. He can be contacted at email: nemi.cse@mbm.ac.in. Int J Inf & Commun T echnol, V ol. 14, No. 1, April 2025: 1–10 Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.