Adversarial Connective-exploiting Networks for Implicit Discourse Relation Classification

Implicit discourse relation classification is of great challenge due to the lack of connectives as strong linguistic cues, which motivates the use of annotated implicit connectives to improve the recognition. We propose a feature imitation framework in which an implicit relation network is driven to learn from another neural network with access to connectives, and thus encouraged to extract similarly salient features for accurate classification. We develop an adversarial model to enable an adaptive imitation scheme through competition between the implicit network and a rival feature discriminator. Our method effectively transfers discriminability of connectives to the implicit features, and achieves state-of-the-art performance on the PDTB benchmark.Comment: To appear in ACL201

Discourse relations and conjoined VPs: automated sense recognition

Sense classification of discourse relations is a sub-task of shallow discourse parsing. Discourse relations can occur both across sentences (inter-sentential) and within sentences (intra-sentential), and more than one discourse relation can hold between the same units. Using a newly available corpus of discourse-annotated intra-sentential conjoined verb phrases, we demonstrate a sequential classification system for their multi-label sense classification. We assess the importance of each feature used in the classification, the feature scope, and what is lost in moving from gold standard manual parses to the output of an off-the-shelf parser

Discourse Structure in Machine Translation Evaluation

In this article, we explore the potential of using sentence-level discourse structure for machine translation evaluation. We first design discourse-aware similarity measures, which use all-subtree kernels to compare discourse parse trees in accordance with the Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST). Then, we show that a simple linear combination with these measures can help improve various existing machine translation evaluation metrics regarding correlation with human judgments both at the segment- and at the system-level. This suggests that discourse information is complementary to the information used by many of the existing evaluation metrics, and thus it could be taken into account when developing richer evaluation metrics, such as the WMT-14 winning combined metric DiscoTKparty. We also provide a detailed analysis of the relevance of various discourse elements and relations from the RST parse trees for machine translation evaluation. In particular we show that: (i) all aspects of the RST tree are relevant, (ii) nuclearity is more useful than relation type, and (iii) the similarity of the translation RST tree to the reference tree is positively correlated with translation quality.Comment: machine translation, machine translation evaluation, discourse analysis. Computational Linguistics, 201

Semantic Tagging with Deep Residual Networks

We propose a novel semantic tagging task, sem-tagging, tailored for the purpose of multilingual semantic parsing, and present the first tagger using deep residual networks (ResNets). Our tagger uses both word and character representations and includes a novel residual bypass architecture. We evaluate the tagset both intrinsically on the new task of semantic tagging, as well as on Part-of-Speech (POS) tagging. Our system, consisting of a ResNet and an auxiliary loss function predicting our semantic tags, significantly outperforms prior results on English Universal Dependencies POS tagging (95.71% accuracy on UD v1.2 and 95.67% accuracy on UD v1.3).Comment: COLING 2016, camera ready versio

A PDTB-Styled End-to-End Discourse Parser

We have developed a full discourse parser in the Penn Discourse Treebank (PDTB) style. Our trained parser first identifies all discourse and non-discourse relations, locates and labels their arguments, and then classifies their relation types. When appropriate, the attribution spans to these relations are also determined. We present a comprehensive evaluation from both component-wise and error-cascading perspectives.Comment: 15 pages, 5 figures, 7 table