Using treebanking discriminants as parse disambiguation features
Abstract
This paper presents a novel approach of incorporating fine-grained treebanking decisions made by human annotators as discriminative features for automatic parse disambiguation. To our best knowledge, this is the first work that exploits treebanking decisions for this task. The advantage of this approach is that use of human judgements is made. The paper presents comparative analyses of the performance of discriminative models built using treebanking decisions and state-of-the-art features. We also highlight how differently these features scale when these models are tested on out-of-domain data. We show that, features extracted using treebanking decisions are more efficient, informative and robust compared to traditional features.
References
[1]
David Carter. 1997. The treebanker: A tool for supervised training of parsed corpora. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Environments for Grammar Development and Linguistic Engineering, Madrid, Spain.
[2]
Eugene Charniak. 2000. A maximum entropy-based parser. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL 2000), pages 132--139, Seattle, USA.
[3]
Murat Ersan and Eugene Charniak. 1995. A statistical syntactic disambiguation program and what it learns. pages 146--159.
[4]
Dan Flickinger. 2000. On building a more efficient grammar by exploiting types. 6(1):15--28.
[5]
Mark Johnson, Stuart Geman, Stephen Canon, Zhiyi Chi, and Stefan Riezler. 1999. Estimators for stochastic unifcation-based grammars. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 1999), pages 535--541, Maryland, USA.
[6]
Valia Kordoni and Yi Zhang. 2009. Annotating wall street journal texts using a hand-crafted deep linguistic grammar. In Proceedings of The Third Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW III), Singapore.
[7]
Stephan Oepen, Kristina Toutanova, Stuart Shieber, Christopher Manning, Dan Flickinger, and Thorsten Brants. 2002. The LinGO Redwoods treebank: motivation and preliminary applications. In Proceedings of COLING 2002: The 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Project Notes, Taipei, Taiwan.
[8]
Stephan Oepen, Helge Dyvik, Jan Tore Lønning, Erik Velldal, Dorothee Beermann, John Carroll, Dan Flickinger, Lars Hellan, Janne Bondi Johannessen, Paul Meurer, Torbjørn Nordgård, and Victoria Rosén. 2004. Som å kappete med trollet? towards mrs-based norwegian-english machine translation. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation, pages 11--20, MD, USA.
[9]
Stephan Oepen. 2001. {incr tsdb()} --- competence and performance laboratory. User manual. Technical report, Computational Linguistics, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany.
[10]
Miles Osborne and Jason Baldridge. 2004. Ensemble-based active learning for parse selection. In HLT-NAACL 2004: Main Proceedings, pages 89--96, Boston, USA.
[11]
Kristina Toutanova, Christoper D. Manning, Dan Flickinger, and Stephan Oepen. 2005. Stochastic HPSG parse selection using the Redwoods corpus. Journal of Research on Language and Computation, 3(1):83--105.
[12]
Gisle Ytrestøl, Stephan Oepen, and Daniel Flickinger. 2009. Extracting and annotating wikipedia sub-domains. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories, pages 185--197, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Index Terms
- Using treebanking discriminants as parse disambiguation features
Recommendations
Using LTAG based features in parse reranking
EMNLP '03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Empirical methods in natural language processingWe propose the use of Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar (LTAG) as a source of features that are useful for reranking the output of a statistical parser. In this paper, we extend the notion of a tree kernel over arbitrary sub-trees of the parse to the ...
Rich bitext projection features for parse reranking
EACL '09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational LinguisticsMany different types of features have been shown to improve accuracy in parse reranking. A class of features that thus far has not been considered is based on a projection of the syntactic structure of a translation of the text to be parsed. The ...
Is it really that difficult to parse German?
EMNLP '06: Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language ProcessingThis paper presents a comparative study of probabilistic treebank parsing of German, using the Negra and TüBa-D/Z tree-banks. Experiments with the Stanford parser, which uses a factored PCFG and dependency model, show that, contrary to previous claims ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
United States
Publication History
Published: 07 October 2009
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 166Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)29
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 31 Dec 2024
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