D6.1: Technologies and Tools for Lexical Acquisition

This report describes the technologies and tools to be used for Lexical Acquisition in PANACEA. It includes descriptions of existing technologies and tools which can be built on and improved within PANACEA, as well as of new technologies and tools to be developed and integrated in PANACEA platform. The report also specifies the Lexical Resources to be produced. Four main areas of lexical acquisition are included: Subcategorization frames (SCFs), Selectional Preferences (SPs), Lexical-semantic Classes (LCs), for both nouns and verbs, and Multi-Word Expressions (MWEs)

Named Entity Recognition Using the Web

Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Anaphora Resolution (WAR II). Editor: Christer Johansson. NEALT Proceedings Series, Vol. 2 (2008), 83-90. © 2008 The editors and contributors. Published by Northern European Association for Language Technology (NEALT) http://omilia.uio.no/nealt . Electronically published at Tartu University Library (Estonia) http://hdl.handle.net/10062/7129

Automatic extraction of subcategorization frames for Italian

Subcategorization is a kind of knowledge which can be considered as crucial in several NLP tasks, such as Information Extraction or parsing, but the collection of very large resources including subcategorization representation is difficult and time-consuming. Various experiences show that the automatic extraction can be a practical and reliable solution for acquiring such a kind of knowledge. The aim of this paper is at investigating the relationships between subcategorization frame extraction and the nature of data from which the frames have to be extracted, e.g. how much the task can be influenced by the richness/poorness of the annotation. Therefore, we present some experiments that apply statistical subcategorization extraction methods, known in literature, on an Italian treebank that exploits a rich set of dependency relations that can be annotated at different degrees of specificity. Benefiting of the availability of relation sets that implement different granularity in the representation of relations, we evaluate our results with reference to previous works in a cross-linguistic perspective. 1

D4.1. Technologies and tools for corpus creation, normalization and annotation

The objectives of the Corpus Acquisition and Annotation (CAA) subsystem are the acquisition and processing of monolingual and bilingual language resources (LRs) required in the PANACEA context. Therefore, the CAA subsystem includes: i) a Corpus Acquisition Component (CAC) for extracting monolingual and bilingual data from the web, ii) a component for cleanup and normalization (CNC) of these data and iii) a text processing component (TPC) which consists of NLP tools including modules for sentence splitting, POS tagging, lemmatization, parsing and named entity recognition

Report on first selection of resources

The central objective of the Metanet4u project is to contribute to the establishment of a pan-European digital platform that makes available language resources and services, encompassing both datasets and software tools, for speech and language processing, and supports a new generation of exchange facilities for them.Peer ReviewedPreprin

TExSIS: bilingual terminology extraction from parallel corpora using chunk-based alignment

A

An Unsolicited Soliloquy on Dependency Parsing

Programa Oficial de Doutoramento en Computación . 5009V01[Abstract] This thesis presents work on dependency parsing covering two distinct lines of research. The first aims to develop efficient parsers so that they can be fast enough to parse large amounts of data while still maintaining decent accuracy. We investigate two techniques to achieve this. The first is a cognitively-inspired method and the second uses a model distillation method. The first technique proved to be utterly dismal, while the second was somewhat of a success. The second line of research presented in this thesis evaluates parsers. This is also done in two ways. We aim to evaluate what causes variation in parsing performance for different algorithms and also different treebanks. This evaluation is grounded in dependency displacements (the directed distance between a dependent and its head) and the subsequent distributions associated with algorithms and the distributions found in treebanks. This work sheds some light on the variation in performance for both different algorithms and different treebanks. And the second part of this area focuses on the utility of part-of-speech tags when used with parsing systems and questions the standard position of assuming that they might help but they certainly won’t hurt.[Resumen] Esta tesis presenta trabajo sobre análisis de dependencias que cubre dos líneas de investigación distintas. La primera tiene como objetivo desarrollar analizadores eficientes, de modo que sean suficientemente rápidos como para analizar grandes volúmenes de datos y, al mismo tiempo, sean suficientemente precisos. Investigamos dos métodos. El primero se basa en teorías cognitivas y el segundo usa una técnica de destilación. La primera técnica resultó un enorme fracaso, mientras que la segunda fue en cierto modo un ´éxito. La otra línea evalúa los analizadores sintácticos. Esto también se hace de dos maneras. Evaluamos la causa de la variación en el rendimiento de los analizadores para distintos algoritmos y corpus. Esta evaluación utiliza la diferencia entre las distribuciones del desplazamiento de arista (la distancia dirigida de las aristas) correspondientes a cada algoritmo y corpus. También evalúa la diferencia entre las distribuciones del desplazamiento de arista en los datos de entrenamiento y prueba. Este trabajo esclarece las variaciones en el rendimiento para algoritmos y corpus diferentes. La segunda parte de esta línea investiga la utilidad de las etiquetas gramaticales para los analizadores sintácticos.[Resumo] Esta tese presenta traballo sobre análise sintáctica, cubrindo dúas liñas de investigación. A primeira aspira a desenvolver analizadores eficientes, de maneira que sexan suficientemente rápidos para procesar grandes volumes de datos e á vez sexan precisos. Investigamos dous métodos. O primeiro baséase nunha teoría cognitiva, e o segundo usa unha técnica de destilación. O primeiro método foi un enorme fracaso, mentres que o segundo foi en certo modo un éxito. A outra liña avalúa os analizadores sintácticos. Esto tamén se fai de dúas maneiras. Avaliamos a causa da variación no rendemento dos analizadores para distintos algoritmos e corpus. Esta avaliaci´on usa a diferencia entre as distribucións do desprazamento de arista (a distancia dirixida das aristas) correspondentes aos algoritmos e aos corpus. Tamén avalía a diferencia entre as distribucións do desprazamento de arista nos datos de adestramento e proba. Este traballo esclarece as variacións no rendemento para algoritmos e corpus diferentes. A segunda parte desta liña investiga a utilidade das etiquetas gramaticais para os analizadores sintácticos.This work has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (FASTPARSE, grant agreement No 714150) and from the Centro de Investigación de Galicia (CITIC) which is funded by the Xunta de Galicia and the European Union (ERDF - Galicia 2014-2020 Program) by grant ED431G 2019/01.Xunta de Galicia; ED431G 2019/0

many faces, many places (Term21)

UIDB/03213/2020 UIDP/03213/2020publishersversionpublishe