The weak generative capacity of linear tree-adjoining grammars
Pages 25 - 32
Abstract
Linear tree-adjoining grammars (TAGs), by analogy with linear context-free grammars, are tree-adjoining grammars in which at most one symbol in each elementary tree can be rewritten (adjoined or substituted at). Uemura et al. (1999), calling these grammars simple linear TAGs (SL-TAGs), show that they generate a class of languages incommensurate with the context-free languages, and can be recognized in O(n4) time.
References
[1]
John E. Hopcroft and Jeffrey D. Ullman. 1979. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
[2]
Aravind K. Joshi. 1985. Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is necessary for assigning structural descriptions? In David Dowty, Lauri Karttunen, and Arnold Zwicky, editors, Natural Language Parsing, pages 206--250. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[3]
Yuki Kato, Hiroyuki Seki, and Tadao Kasami. 2004. Subclasses of tree adjoining grammar for RNA secondary structure. In Proc. Seventh International Workshop on TAG and Related Formalisms (TAG+), pages 48--55.
[4]
Bernard Lang. 1994. Recognition can be harder than parsing. Computational Intelligence, 10(4):484--494. Special Issue on Tree Adjoining Grammars.
[5]
Owen Rambow and Giorgio Satta. 1999. Independent parallelism in finite copying parallel rewriting systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 223:87--120.
[6]
James Rogers. 1994. Capturing CFLs with tree adjoining grammars. In Proc. 32nd Annual Meeting of the ACL, pages 155--162.
[7]
Giorgio Satta and William Schuler. 1998. Restrictions on tree adjoining languages. In Proc. COLING-ACL, pages 1176--1182.
[8]
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, 21:479--513.
[9]
Yves Schabes. 1990. Mathematical and Computational Aspects of Lexicalized Grammars. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Available as technical report MS-CIS-90-48.
[10]
Yasuo Uemura, Aki Hasegawa, Satoshi Kobayashi, and Takashi Yokomori. 1999. Tree adjoining grammars for RNA structure prediction. Theoretical Computer Science, 210:277--303.
[11]
K Vijayashanker. 1987. A study of tree adjoining grammars. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Available as technical report MS-CIS-88-03.
[12]
Dekai Wu. 1997. Stochastic inversion transduction grammars and bilingual parsing of parallel corpora. Computational Linguistics, 23:377--404.
- The weak generative capacity of linear tree-adjoining grammars
Recommendations
An Earley-type parsing algorithm for Tree Adjoining Grammars
ACL '88: Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting on Association for Computational LinguisticsWe 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 ...
The tree-generative capacity of combinatory categorial grammars
AbstractThe generative capacity of combinatory categorial grammars (CCGs) as generators of tree languages is investigated. It is demonstrated that the tree languages generated by CCGs can also be generated by simple monadic context-free tree ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
United States
Publication History
Published: 15 July 2006
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 142Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)24
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in