10 Agnieszka Patyk

![0_image_0.png](0_image_0.png)

![0_image_1.png](0_image_1.png)

![0_image_2.png](0_image_2.png)

![0_image_3.png](0_image_3.png)

![0_image_4.png](0_image_4.png)

- the number of blades in (5a) ] see*ob j* is uneven when using Plate construction, hence the possibility that blades' similarities cancel each other out is smaller than in case of the agent-object construction - such hypothesis would be backed up by test results depicted in Figure 4.

These hypotheses led to a conclusion that perhaps a random blade should be added to those sentences that have an even number of blades, similarly to BSC.

A correct answer might not be recognized for two reasons:
- the correct answer has an even number of blades and their similarities cancelled each other out completely because of having opposite signs - hence such an answer does not even appear within the set of potential answers,
- there are some pseudo-answers leading to a higher inner product because the similarities of blades of a correct answer cancelled each other partially.
Adding random extra blades that make the number of blades in a multivector odd
(for short: *odding blades*) is a solution to the first reason why a correct answer is not recognized. Further, an odding blade acts as a distinct marker belonging only to one sentence (for sufficiently large data size) distinguishing it from other sentences, unlike the extra blade representing action in Plate construction which may appear in numerous sentences. Unfortunately, to address the second problem, we need to employ some other measurement of similarity than the inner product. We will show in Section 4, that Hamming and Euclidean measures perform very well in that case.

Observation of preliminary recognition test results led to a conclusion, that sentences with an even number of blades behave quite differently than sentences with an odd number of blades. In the following tests we inspected the average number