Refine
Document Type
- Preprint (8)
- Part of a Book (1)
- diplomthesis (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (11)
Keywords
- Coreference annotation (1)
- Sloppiness (1)
- Vagueness (1)
Institute
- Extern (10)
How to compare treebanks
(2008)
Recent years have seen an increasing interest in developing standards for linguistic annotation, with a focus on the interoperability of the resources. This effort, however, requires a profound knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of linguistic annotation schemes in order to avoid importing the flaws and weaknesses of existing encoding schemes into the new standards. This paper addresses the question how to compare syntactically annotated corpora and gain insights into the usefulness of specific design decisions. We present an exhaustive evaluation of two German treebanks with crucially different encoding schemes. We evaluate three different parsers trained on the two treebanks and compare results using EVALB, the Leaf-Ancestor metric, and a dependency-based evaluation. Furthermore, we present TePaCoC, a new testsuite for the evaluation of parsers on complex German grammatical constructions. The testsuite provides a well thought-out error classification, which enables us to compare parser output for parsers trained on treebanks with different encoding schemes and provides interesting insights into the impact of treebank annotation schemes on specific constructions like PP attachment or non-constituent coordination.
This paper is concerned with the tagging of spatial expressions in German newspaper articles, assigning a meaning to the expression and classifying the usages of the spatial expression and linking the derived referent to an event description. In our system, we implemented the activation of concepts in a very simple fashion, a concept is activated once (with a cost depending on the item that activated it) and is left activated thereafter. As an example, a city also activates the nodes for the region and the country it is part of, so that cities from one country are chosen over cities from different countries. A test corpus of 12 German newspaper articles was tested regarding several disambiguation strategies. Disambiguation was carried out via a beam search to find an approximately cost-optimal solution for the conflict set of potential grounding candidates for the tagged spatial expression. Test showed that the disambiguation strategies improved accuracy significantly.
In this paper, we investigate the usefulness of a wide range of features for their usefulness in the resolution of nominal coreference, both as hard constraints (i.e. completely removing elements from the list of possible candidates) as well as soft constraints (where a cumulation of violations of soft constraints will make it less likely that a candidate is chosen as the antecedent). We present a state of the art system based on such constraints and weights estimated with a maximum entropy model, using lexical information to resolve cases of coreferent bridging.
We adopt Markert and Nissim (2005)’s approach of using the World Wide Web to resolve cases of coreferent bridging for German and discuss the strength and weaknesses of this approach. As the general approach of using surface patterns to get information on ontological relations between lexical items has only been tried on English, it is also interesting to see whether the approach works for German as well as it does for English and what differences between these languages need to be accounted for. We also present a novel approach for combining several patterns that yields an ensemble that outperforms the best-performing single patterns in terms of both precision and recall.
When a statistical parser is trained on one treebank, one usually tests it on another portion of the same treebank, partly due to the fact that a comparable annotation format is needed for testing. But the user of a parser may not be interested in parsing sentences from the same newspaper all over, or even wants syntactic annotations for a slightly different text type. Gildea (2001) for instance found that a parser trained on the WSJ portion of the Penn Treebank performs less well on the Brown corpus (the subset that is available in the PTB bracketing format) than a parser that has been trained only on the Brown corpus, although the latter one has only half as many sentences as the former. Additionally, a parser trained on both the WSJ and Brown corpora performs less well on the Brown corpus than on the WSJ one. This leads us to the following questions that we would like to address in this paper: - Is there a difference in usefulness of techniques that are used to improve parser performance between the same-corpus and the different-corpus case? - Are different types of parsers (rule-based and statistical) equally sensitive to corpus variation? To achieve this, we compared the quality of the parses of a hand-crafted constraint-based parser and a statistical PCFG-based parser that was trained on a treebank of German newspaper text.
We investigate methods to improve the recall in coreference resolution by also trying to resolve those definite descriptions where no earlier mention of the referent shares the same lexical head (coreferent bridging). The problem, which is notably harder than identifying coreference relations among mentions which have the same lexical head, has been tackled with several rather different approaches, and we attempt to provide a meaningful classification along with a quantitative comparison. Based on the different merits of the methods, we discuss possibilities to improve them and show how they can be effectively combined.
Using a qualitative analysis of disagreements from a referentially annotated newspaper corpus, we show that, in coreference annotation, vague referents are prone to greater disagreement. We show how potentially problematic cases can be dealt with in a way that is practical even for larger-scale annotation, considering a real-world example from newspaper text.
Tagging kausaler Relationen
(2005)
In dieser Diplomarbeit geht es um kausale Beziehungen zwischen Ereignissen und Erklärungsbeziehungen zwischen Ereignissen, bei denen kausale Relationen eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Nachdem zeitliche Relationen einerseits ihrer einfacheren Formalisierbarkeit und andererseits ihrer gut sichtbaren Rolle in der Grammatik (Tempus und Aspekt, zeitliche Konjunktionen) wegen in jüngerer Zeit stärker im Mittelpunkt des Interesses standen, soll hier argumentiert werden, dass kausale Beziehungen und die Erklärungen, die sie ermöglichen, eine wichtigere Rolle im Kohärenzgefüge des Textes spielen. Im Gegensatz zu “tiefen” Verfahren, die auf einer detaillierten semantischen Repr¨asentation des Textes aufsetzen und infolgedessen für unrestringierten Text m. E. nicht geeignet sind, wird hier untersucht, wie man dieses Ziel erreichen kann, ohne sich auf eine aufwändig konstruierte Wissensbasis verlassen zu müssen.
In this paper, we argue that difficulties in the definition of coreference itself contribute to lower inter-annotator agreement in certain cases. Data from a large referentially annotated corpus serves to corroborate this point, using a quantitative investigation to assess which effects or problems are likely to be the most prominent. Several examples where such problems occur are discussed in more detail, and we then propose a generalisation of Poesio, Reyle and Stevenson’s Justified Sloppiness Hypothesis to provide a unified model for these cases of disagreement and argue that a deeper understanding of the phenomena involved allows to tackle problematic cases in a more principled fashion than would be possible using only pre-theoretic intuitions.
Distributional approximations to lexical semantics are very useful not only in helping the creation of lexical semantic resources (Kilgariff et al., 2004; Snow et al., 2006), but also when directly applied in tasks that can benefit from large-coverage semantic knowledge such as coreference resolution (Poesio et al., 1998; Gasperin and Vieira, 2004; Versley, 2007), word sense disambiguation (Mc- Carthy et al., 2004) or semantical role labeling (Gordon and Swanson, 2007). We present a model that is built from Webbased corpora using both shallow patterns for grammatical and semantic relations and a window-based approach, using singular value decomposition to decorrelate the feature space which is otherwise too heavily influenced by the skewed topic distribution of Web corpora.