Acquiring Word-Meaning Mappings for Natural Language Interfaces

This paper focuses on a system, WOLFIE (WOrd Learning From Interpreted Examples), that acquires a semantic lexicon from a corpus of sentences paired with semantic representations. The lexicon learned consists of phrases paired with meaning representations. WOLFIE is part of an integrated system that learns to transform sentences into representations such as logical database queries. Experimental results are presented demonstrating WOLFIE's ability to learn useful lexicons for a database interface in four different natural languages. The usefulness of the lexicons learned by WOLFIE are compared to those acquired by a similar system, with results favorable to WOLFIE. A second set of experiments demonstrates WOLFIE's ability to scale to larger and more difficult, albeit artificially generated, corpora. In natural language acquisition, it is difficult to gather the annotated data needed for supervised learning; however, unannotated data is fairly plentiful. Active learning methods attempt to select for annotation and training only the most informative examples, and therefore are potentially very useful in natural language applications. However, most results to date for active learning have only considered standard classification tasks. To reduce annotation effort while maintaining accuracy, we apply active learning to semantic lexicons. We show that active learning can significantly reduce the number of annotated examples required to achieve a given level of performance

Automatic parsing of sports videos with grammars

Motivated by the analogies between languages and sports videos, we introduce a novel approach for video parsing with grammars. It utilizes compiler techniques for integrating both semantic annotation and syntactic analysis to generate a semantic index of events and a table of content for a given sports video. The video sequence is first segmented and annotated by event detection with domain knowledge. A grammar-based parser is then used to identify the structure of the video content. Meanwhile, facilities for error handling are introduced which are particularly useful when the results of automatic parsing need to be adjusted. As a case study, we have developed a system for video parsing in the particular domain of TV diving programs. Experimental results indicate the proposed approach is effectiv

Wide-coverage deep statistical parsing using automatic dependency structure annotation

A number of researchers (Lin 1995; Carroll, Briscoe, and Sanfilippo 1998; Carroll et al. 2002; Clark and Hockenmaier 2002; King et al. 2003; Preiss 2003; Kaplan et al. 2004;Miyao and Tsujii 2004) have convincingly argued for the use of dependency (rather than CFG-tree) representations for parser evaluation. Preiss (2003) and Kaplan et al. (2004) conducted a number of experiments comparing “deep” hand-crafted wide-coverage with “shallow” treebank- and machine-learning based parsers at the level of dependencies, using simple and automatic methods to convert tree output generated by the shallow parsers into dependencies. In this article, we revisit the experiments in Preiss (2003) and Kaplan et al. (2004), this time using the sophisticated automatic LFG f-structure annotation methodologies of Cahill et al. (2002b, 2004) and Burke (2006), with surprising results. We compare various PCFG and history-based parsers (based on Collins, 1999; Charniak, 2000; Bikel, 2002) to find a baseline parsing system that fits best into our automatic dependency structure annotation technique. This combined system of syntactic parser and dependency structure annotation is compared to two hand-crafted, deep constraint-based parsers (Carroll and Briscoe 2002; Riezler et al. 2002). We evaluate using dependency-based gold standards (DCU 105, PARC 700, CBS 500 and dependencies for WSJ Section 22) and use the Approximate Randomization Test (Noreen 1989) to test the statistical significance of the results. Our experiments show that machine-learning-based shallow grammars augmented with sophisticated automatic dependency annotation technology outperform hand-crafted, deep, widecoverage constraint grammars. Currently our best system achieves an f-score of 82.73% against the PARC 700 Dependency Bank (King et al. 2003), a statistically significant improvement of 2.18%over the most recent results of 80.55%for the hand-crafted LFG grammar and XLE parsing system of Riezler et al. (2002), and an f-score of 80.23% against the CBS 500 Dependency Bank (Carroll, Briscoe, and Sanfilippo 1998), a statistically significant 3.66% improvement over the 76.57% achieved by the hand-crafted RASP grammar and parsing system of Carroll and Briscoe (2002)