Article

Free access

Restrictions on tree adjoining languages

Authors:

ACL '98/COLING '98: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics - Volume 2

Pages 1176 - 1182

https://doi.org/10.3115/980691.980761

Published: 10 August 1998 Publication History

PDF eReader

Abstract

Several methods are known for parsing languages generated by Tree Adjoining Grammars (TAGs) in O(n⁶) worst case running time. In this paper we investigate which restrictions on TAGs and TAG derivations are needed in order to lower this O(n⁶) time complexity, without introducing large runtime constants, and without losing any of the generative power needed to capture the syntactic constructions in natural language that can be handled by unrestricted TAGs. In particular, we describe an algorithm for parsing a strict subcalss of TAG in O(n⁵), and attempt to show that this subclass retains enough generative power to make it useful in the general case.

References

[1]

Noam Chomsky. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Foris, Dordercht.

Google Scholar

[2]

Robert Frank. 1992. Syntactic locality and tree adjoining grammar: grammatical acquisition and processing perspectives. Ph.D. thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Pennsylvania.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[3]

Beth Ann Hockey and Srinivas Bangalore. 1993. Feature-based TAG in place of multi-component adjunction: computational implications. In Proceedings of the Natural Language Processing Pacific Rim Symposium (NLPRS), Fukuoka, Japan.

Google Scholar

[4]

Aravind K. Joshi. 1985. How much context sensitivity is necessary for characterizing structural descriptions: Tree adjoining grammars. In L. Karttunen D. Dowty and A. Zwicky, editors, Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational and theoretical perspectives, pages 206--250. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Google Scholar

[5]

Anthony S. Kroch and Beatrice Santorini. 1991. The derived constituent structure of west germanic verb-raising construction. In Robert Freidin, editor, Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, pages 269--338. MIT Press.

Google Scholar

[6]

Anthony S. Kroch. 1989. Asymmetries in long distance extraction in a TAG grammar. In M. Baltin and A. Kroch, editors, Alternative Conceptions of Phrase Structure, pages 66--98. University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar

[7]

Sanguthevar Rajasekaran and Shibu Yooseph. 1995. TAL recognition in O(M(n2)) time. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL '95).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[8]

James Rogers. 1994. Capturing CFLs with tree adjoining grammars. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL '94).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[9]

Giorgio Satta. 1994. Tree adjoining grammar parsing and boolean matrix multiplication. Computational Linguistics, 20(2): 173--192.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[10]

Yves Schabes and Aravind K. Joshi. 1991. Parsing with lexicalized tree adjoining grammar. In M. Tomita, editor, Current Issues in Parsing Technologies. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Google Scholar

[11]

Yves Schabes and Stuart M. Shieber. 1994. An alternative conception of tree-adjoining derivation. Computational Linguistics, 20(1): 91--124.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[12]

Yves Schabes and Richard C. Waters. 1993. Lexicalized context-free grammars. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL '93).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[13]

Yves Schabes and Richard C. Waters. 1995. Tree insertion grammar: A cubic-time parsable formalism that lexicalizes context-free grammar without changing the trees produced. Computational Linguistics, 21(4): 479--515.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[14]

Stuart M. Shieber, Yves Schabes, and Fernando C. N. Pereira. 1995. Principles and implementation of deductive parsing. Journal of Logic Programming, 24: 3--36.

Crossref

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Pitler EKannan SMarcus MTsujii JHenderson JPasca M(2012)Dynamic programming for higher order parsing of gap-minding treesProceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning10.5555/2390948.2391005(478-488)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2390948.2391005
Chiang DBecker TKallmeyer L(2006)The weak generative capacity of linear tree-adjoining grammarsProceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammar and Related Formalisms10.5555/1654690.1654694(25-32)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1654690.1654694

Restrictions on tree adjoining languages

Recommendations

Deterministic left to right parsing of Tree Adjoining Languages
ACL '90: Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics

We define a set of deterministic bottom-up left to right parsers which analyze a subset of Tree Adjoining Languages. The LR parsing strategy for Context Free Grammars is extended to Tree Adjoining Grammars (TAGs). We use a machine, called Bottom-up ...
Adjoining tree-to-string translation
HLT '11: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies - Volume 1

We introduce synchronous tree adjoining grammars (TAG) into tree-to-string translation, which converts a source tree to a target string. Without reconstructing TAG derivations explicitly, our rule extraction algorithm directly learns tree-to-string ...
An Earley-type parsing algorithm for Tree Adjoining Grammars
ACL '88: Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics

We will describe an Earley-type parser for Tree Adjoining Grammars (TAGs). Although a CKY-type parser for TAGs has been developed earlier (Vijay-Shanker and Joshi, 1985), this is the first practical parser for TAGs because as is well known for CFGs, the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ACL '98/COLING '98: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics - Volume 2

August 1998

768 pages

Program Chairs:
Christian Boitet
Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble, France
,
Pete Whitelock
Sharp Laboratories of Europe Ltd., Oxford, United Kingdom

Publisher

Association for Computational Linguistics

United States

Publication History

Published: 10 August 1998

Qualifiers

Article

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 85 of 443 submissions, 19%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
256
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)50
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

Reflects downloads up to 04 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Pitler EKannan SMarcus MTsujii JHenderson JPasca M(2012)Dynamic programming for higher order parsing of gap-minding treesProceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning10.5555/2390948.2391005(478-488)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2390948.2391005
Chiang DBecker TKallmeyer L(2006)The weak generative capacity of linear tree-adjoining grammarsProceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammar and Related Formalisms10.5555/1654690.1654694(25-32)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1654690.1654694

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Recommendations

Deterministic left to right parsing of Tree Adjoining Languages

Adjoining tree-to-string translation

An Earley-type parsing algorithm for Tree Adjoining Grammars

Comments

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Acceptance Rates

Other Metrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Cited By

PDF

eReader

Login options

Full Access

Abstract

References

Cited By

Recommendations

Deterministic left to right parsing of Tree Adjoining Languages

Adjoining tree-to-string translation

An Earley-type parsing algorithm for Tree Adjoining Grammars

Comments

Information

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Acceptance Rates

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View options

PDF

eReader

Login options

Full Access

Figures

Other

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations